The Wizard of Beck

[Johnny Slick]

Just months after the election and the humiliation, everyone is again convinced that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and the rest possess real power. And the saddest thing is that even Republican politicians come to believe it. They mistake media for reality. They pre-emptively surrender to armies that don’t exist.

They pay more attention to Rush’s imaginary millions than to the real voters down the street.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/opinion/02brooks.html

[Silas Sparkhammer]

The trouble is, they do have real power...if only in an indirect form.

They are listened to be tens of millions of people, many of whom will vote the way these figures recommend. Since the entire House of Representatives is replaced every two years, the House, at least, cannot afford to ignore Rush et al. They have influenced major political decisions on many occasions, and they have swug the outcomes of several elections.

Talk radio was, to some degree (I would say to a large degree) responsible for the recall of California's governor, Gray Davis, and his replacement by Arnold Schwarzanegger.

The power of the press should never be underestimated. It has started wars.

Silas

[Johnny Slick]

Well... SOMEBODY took away my commentary but at least in 2008 Rush et al did anything but swing elections. McCain was if anything the whipping boy of these guys right up until the moment he was nominated, Rush's little idea to get conservatives to register as Democrats in order to vote for Hillary did absolutely nothing, and if they did anything to public perception is was to paint McCain, who is anything but a moderate, as a liberal Republican who needed a staunch family values type to "balance" the ticket.

I think the clout of these folks comes when the mainstream media take them seriously, which they did in the mid to late 90s, did a bit less in 2000 (although IIRC the "I invented the Internet" and the "OMG LIES ABOUT LOVE STORY" things were generated by radio people), didn't do a lot of in 2004 (the Swift Boat story was the one big exception but even then that was covered by the mainstream press pretty much immediately and before Rush and co. did much at all to hype it up), and not at all in 2008. Part of that was the attitude of the people the Democrats trotted out (Obama was much, much better at handling them than Gore, and Kerry looked completely lost when it came to confronting right wing talkers), but IMO a lot of it was a trend. A fad, even.

The flip side of this is that Rush Limbaugh in particular owes a great deal of his popularity to his perceived clout. That's one reason why he loves, simply loves to quote his ratings every chance he can get. And if somebody actually *mentions* him outside of his show, he'll crow about it for weeks. There was a time, believe it or not (actually you probably remember) when Rush was gaining listeners because, political ideology or no, he was pretty entertaining. Now the show is entirely about hubris.

ETA: Re: Gray Davis, I wasn't in California at the time of course but my memory of the situation was that the Democrats fabulously mismanaged that whole set-up. Specifically they ought to have made a decision as to whether to stop the recall or to go with their own man. They kind of did it half and half. I can understand some of the reasons for doing so - conceding Davis' recall was probably the more practical move of the two but he still held a lot of political clout in the state party (actual clout, not pretend talk radio clout). Nonetheless, their divided message ("don't recall Gray Davis and, um, if you do, vote for our guy!") was as much responsible for Governor Ahnold as anything else. Also, Schwarzennegger threw his hat into the ring on a mainstream television show, not radio, and I'm convinced that he won due to name recognition and that he was a real moderate rather than a McCain moderate. Were right wing radio/TV guys pushing for him? Of course. They could see a winner when they saw one and they knew that if they hooked themselves up to him they could take partial credit for people doing what they were going to do anyway.

[Silas Sparkhammer]

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

. . . actual clout, not pretend talk radio clout . . . .

I guess my real point is that there is less difference between the two than you might think. Governmental power and legitimacy are based, in large part, upon the popular perception. A "lame duck" President has exactly the same power as a "honeymoon" President -- as far as the Constitution is concerned. But as far as actual ability to influence legislation, the latter has vastly more power than the former.

Power and legitimacy are, to a degree, "illusions." Up to a point, the people actually will adore the Emperor's new clothes. Later, they will claim that they always knew he was naked, but, at the same time, they were lining the street and cheering -- "What an impressive trousseau!" -- not saying, "Lookit his pink little willy, durnit!"

Silas