I believe that the corporate media like the NYT and the Cook report or more interested in driving a narrative then providing us with accurate polling information. The NYT polling curiously tracks its false criticisms of Harris regarding alleged failure to take stands on issues. Also, the “too far left to govern” is also a Cook Report planted polling question seeking to drive a narrative to embrace the middle. It seems that the so-called undecided and perhaps low information voters, have a lot of information supplied them by the pollsters who are seeking to drive the results wanted by those and other similar publications. There’s already too much reporting on polls with out the polling tricks of the corporate media that wants elect trump and halt enforcement of anti trust laws.
I created a Substack newsletter in my hometown of Martinez, CA, to provide local news after the mainstream papers either folded or abandoned us. My biggest financial supporter is someone whom I disagree with on many political and local issues but who values the importance of local news and informed citizenry. Even though I also play the role of an activist in my community on issues I care about, people know I will be faithful to the facts in what I report, and they know that unlike the MSM outlets that will only parachute in to get their clicks when they can cash in on alarmist narratives, I’m invested in my community and will provide the context and nuance that they either can’t or won’t.
I can’t say I really understand the undecided voter who continues to give a racist, misogynistic, autocratic who tries to overthrow elections he doesn’t win chance after chance or if it’s related to the local news crisis. I think we also have a basic empathy crisis in America that perhaps the decline in local news has exacerbated. But news coverage can also exacerbate it when journalists are more concerned with clicks than the depth and complexity of the human experience.
I never watch political conventions but I watched all 4 nights of this DNC, and caught about half of the speeches. I caught myself crying quite a few times. The thing that struck me the most was realizing just how much power we can put behind good causes when we work together.
Yes, there are always differences of opinion, and all voices need to be heard, but if we want to get shit done, we need to pull together as one.
Good morning, Margaret. I think about all the speeches I've seen this week -- many live, some on YouTube the next morning -- and it's hard to pick one as the best. There were so many good ones -- Rep. Jasmine Crockett, VP nominee Tim Walz, even, God help me, Al Sharpton. But if I had to pick one, it would be that of Sen. Raphael Warnock, the pastor of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King's former church. I grew up a churchgoer, and he took his audience, in the arena and on TV, to church in the best possible way. I suspect I'll be rewatching that one on YouTube many times in the coming weeks and months.
Agree that many of the undecideds are "low information voters." But elite media outlets are, in part, to blame. As media critic Dan Froomkin writes, "... by sticking to the traditional both-sides format of political news coverage – rather than constantly sounding the alarm over Trump and MAGA — the elite media has created a permission structure for those low-information voters to throw up their hands and say 'whatever'."
Many people cling to trump because they regard him as a successful businessman. I kow the story’s been told and told but they don’t think about his low ethical standards and his failures. King of debt indeed.
It is impossible to characterize undecided voters by interviewing a mere half dozen of them. It's not like they picked 6 out of hundreds of interviews to present a consensus picture. Moreover, MSM seem to find only those who are still undecided to reinforce their frame that we're still hopelessly divided.
I think "the undecided voter" is a fiction. That said, far be it for me to explain why. Also, I think America's news deserts are a large factor in the political polarization we seem to have.
I did not watch the convention, choosing to read about each night the next day.
Hi Margaret, indeed the choice is stark. Part of the mystery is that the vast majority of the press is still focused on the odds and not the stakes. I'm not sure many in the press see a role in opining about the stakes. I could be wrong, but I think it historically significant that roughly a half dozen prominent Republicans spoke compellingly at the DNC about the threat of another Trump term and in favor of the Harris-Walz ticket. It will be interesting to see how the press handles that.
I also feel that, until the convention at least, Democrats have not done enough to define the stakes. Apparently they felt that the "threat to democracy" approach wasn't resonating. Since the SCOTUS decision in Trump v US, I felt that an argument around the rule of law carried more potential. On January 20, 2021, a lawless president was dismissed from office by the people. On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court created a lawless presidency at the behest of that lawless president. It is imperative that the lawless former president not be allowed back into the office of the lawless presidency. Policy concerns pale compared to that imperative.
Trump is right that if you repeat a lie often and with conviction, people believe it. Truth and consequences requires the same consistent drumbeat I think.
I wrote this to a friend who said he was thinking about not voting . . .
“Kamala is pushing unity rather than the division Donald and the G.O.P.
Anyway . . . think about the links I shared and if you want we can talk. For what it is worth not voting is not a good idea. Why? Because voting isn’t just about your person winning, but advocating for your perspective —win or lose. Sometimes we don’t get the result we hope for (kinda like farming), but if we don’t strive for it we won’t get it except by luck of the coin toss.
Myself I have to be active and visible because the risk of my rights being taken away or diminished is too great. That very idea is not in line with the Freedom we all hope for.
I fully expect that if Trump somehow gets into the Whitehouse I might have to make plans to leave the USA . . . because of the discrimination and oppression that he would enable against many minorities including LGBT folk such as me.”
I believe undecided voters reflect an apathy because they don’t trust politicians to do what they promise. It’s easy to see things this way given the diet of negative and gotcha stories of elected officials. The pessimism of ”low information voters” is under understandable given the dangerously low level of the teaching of civics and how government works in our schools.
Margaret, the speeches of AOC and Hillary were the most prominent ones for me, and there were many that were nearly as powerful in terms of the impact I felt. After seeing and hearing them, and then seeing and hearing Senator Warnock, I wrote to a close friend this week, “Isn't it amazing that it seems normal now to see people who have different skin tones as just right - Presidential-seeming with no ‘but’ or ‘except’.”
The undecided voters are definitely uninformed or misinformed. How can we get information to the masses? That IS the American crisis right now. Big media is becoming more and more unreliable, small media is disappearing, and social media is endless noise. Maybe the future is trustworthy regional media like the Minnesota Star Tribune is attempting.
Harris's speech at the DNC is one of the few I've watched completely in recent years, and it was time well invested. She did not seek oratorical grandeur (a common failing in such speeches). Rather, in that very unnatural setting, she sounded natural -- just talking with her audience, rather than speaking at them. I suspect that this is really her style, and that if she is elected we will hear a great deal of it -- which I will find refreshing.
I didn't watch the DNC live, but caught up on all the recommended speeches; I agree that Reverend Warnock's speech was wonderful. I wish Bill Clinton had said something like: "Like Donald Trump, I too was a sexual predator, and someone like him should never be allowed near the oval office again." Too much to hope for I guess.
I read that article in the Times about the undecideds with dismay; it was perhaps encapsulated by the voter who said, to the effect of: I don't like Harris because she flip flops, she was for Medicare for all, but then she came out for the public option, so I just don't trust her... I don't know how one combats such ignorance.
I believe that the corporate media like the NYT and the Cook report or more interested in driving a narrative then providing us with accurate polling information. The NYT polling curiously tracks its false criticisms of Harris regarding alleged failure to take stands on issues. Also, the “too far left to govern” is also a Cook Report planted polling question seeking to drive a narrative to embrace the middle. It seems that the so-called undecided and perhaps low information voters, have a lot of information supplied them by the pollsters who are seeking to drive the results wanted by those and other similar publications. There’s already too much reporting on polls with out the polling tricks of the corporate media that wants elect trump and halt enforcement of anti trust laws.
I created a Substack newsletter in my hometown of Martinez, CA, to provide local news after the mainstream papers either folded or abandoned us. My biggest financial supporter is someone whom I disagree with on many political and local issues but who values the importance of local news and informed citizenry. Even though I also play the role of an activist in my community on issues I care about, people know I will be faithful to the facts in what I report, and they know that unlike the MSM outlets that will only parachute in to get their clicks when they can cash in on alarmist narratives, I’m invested in my community and will provide the context and nuance that they either can’t or won’t.
I can’t say I really understand the undecided voter who continues to give a racist, misogynistic, autocratic who tries to overthrow elections he doesn’t win chance after chance or if it’s related to the local news crisis. I think we also have a basic empathy crisis in America that perhaps the decline in local news has exacerbated. But news coverage can also exacerbate it when journalists are more concerned with clicks than the depth and complexity of the human experience.
I never watch political conventions but I watched all 4 nights of this DNC, and caught about half of the speeches. I caught myself crying quite a few times. The thing that struck me the most was realizing just how much power we can put behind good causes when we work together.
Yes, there are always differences of opinion, and all voices need to be heard, but if we want to get shit done, we need to pull together as one.
Good morning, Margaret. I think about all the speeches I've seen this week -- many live, some on YouTube the next morning -- and it's hard to pick one as the best. There were so many good ones -- Rep. Jasmine Crockett, VP nominee Tim Walz, even, God help me, Al Sharpton. But if I had to pick one, it would be that of Sen. Raphael Warnock, the pastor of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King's former church. I grew up a churchgoer, and he took his audience, in the arena and on TV, to church in the best possible way. I suspect I'll be rewatching that one on YouTube many times in the coming weeks and months.
I missed that in real time, Lex, but will be sure to watch it on your recommendation. Thanks!
Agree that many of the undecideds are "low information voters." But elite media outlets are, in part, to blame. As media critic Dan Froomkin writes, "... by sticking to the traditional both-sides format of political news coverage – rather than constantly sounding the alarm over Trump and MAGA — the elite media has created a permission structure for those low-information voters to throw up their hands and say 'whatever'."
Many people cling to trump because they regard him as a successful businessman. I kow the story’s been told and told but they don’t think about his low ethical standards and his failures. King of debt indeed.
He has failed in just about every business he has had.
It is impossible to characterize undecided voters by interviewing a mere half dozen of them. It's not like they picked 6 out of hundreds of interviews to present a consensus picture. Moreover, MSM seem to find only those who are still undecided to reinforce their frame that we're still hopelessly divided.
I think "the undecided voter" is a fiction. That said, far be it for me to explain why. Also, I think America's news deserts are a large factor in the political polarization we seem to have.
I did not watch the convention, choosing to read about each night the next day.
You saved a lot of time!
Hi Margaret, indeed the choice is stark. Part of the mystery is that the vast majority of the press is still focused on the odds and not the stakes. I'm not sure many in the press see a role in opining about the stakes. I could be wrong, but I think it historically significant that roughly a half dozen prominent Republicans spoke compellingly at the DNC about the threat of another Trump term and in favor of the Harris-Walz ticket. It will be interesting to see how the press handles that.
I also feel that, until the convention at least, Democrats have not done enough to define the stakes. Apparently they felt that the "threat to democracy" approach wasn't resonating. Since the SCOTUS decision in Trump v US, I felt that an argument around the rule of law carried more potential. On January 20, 2021, a lawless president was dismissed from office by the people. On July 1, 2024, the Supreme Court created a lawless presidency at the behest of that lawless president. It is imperative that the lawless former president not be allowed back into the office of the lawless presidency. Policy concerns pale compared to that imperative.
Trump is right that if you repeat a lie often and with conviction, people believe it. Truth and consequences requires the same consistent drumbeat I think.
Thanks Margaret! Again, right on target! MWS
I wrote this to a friend who said he was thinking about not voting . . .
“Kamala is pushing unity rather than the division Donald and the G.O.P.
Anyway . . . think about the links I shared and if you want we can talk. For what it is worth not voting is not a good idea. Why? Because voting isn’t just about your person winning, but advocating for your perspective —win or lose. Sometimes we don’t get the result we hope for (kinda like farming), but if we don’t strive for it we won’t get it except by luck of the coin toss.
Myself I have to be active and visible because the risk of my rights being taken away or diminished is too great. That very idea is not in line with the Freedom we all hope for.
I fully expect that if Trump somehow gets into the Whitehouse I might have to make plans to leave the USA . . . because of the discrimination and oppression that he would enable against many minorities including LGBT folk such as me.”
I believe undecided voters reflect an apathy because they don’t trust politicians to do what they promise. It’s easy to see things this way given the diet of negative and gotcha stories of elected officials. The pessimism of ”low information voters” is under understandable given the dangerously low level of the teaching of civics and how government works in our schools.
Margaret, the speeches of AOC and Hillary were the most prominent ones for me, and there were many that were nearly as powerful in terms of the impact I felt. After seeing and hearing them, and then seeing and hearing Senator Warnock, I wrote to a close friend this week, “Isn't it amazing that it seems normal now to see people who have different skin tones as just right - Presidential-seeming with no ‘but’ or ‘except’.”
Rick
The undecided voters are definitely uninformed or misinformed. How can we get information to the masses? That IS the American crisis right now. Big media is becoming more and more unreliable, small media is disappearing, and social media is endless noise. Maybe the future is trustworthy regional media like the Minnesota Star Tribune is attempting.
Harris's speech at the DNC is one of the few I've watched completely in recent years, and it was time well invested. She did not seek oratorical grandeur (a common failing in such speeches). Rather, in that very unnatural setting, she sounded natural -- just talking with her audience, rather than speaking at them. I suspect that this is really her style, and that if she is elected we will hear a great deal of it -- which I will find refreshing.
I didn't watch the DNC live, but caught up on all the recommended speeches; I agree that Reverend Warnock's speech was wonderful. I wish Bill Clinton had said something like: "Like Donald Trump, I too was a sexual predator, and someone like him should never be allowed near the oval office again." Too much to hope for I guess.
I read that article in the Times about the undecideds with dismay; it was perhaps encapsulated by the voter who said, to the effect of: I don't like Harris because she flip flops, she was for Medicare for all, but then she came out for the public option, so I just don't trust her... I don't know how one combats such ignorance.