Courting the "stupid vote".

Great Debates
1

Prior to the 2000 Presidential election, radio stations in Missouri were airing a political ad that warned their audience that if they didn’t vote, they would be allowing the burning of black churches and assaults on their fellow “brothers”.

Meaning not that if they just didn’t vote, but if they didn’t vote Democratic.

Just recently, on Oprah Winfrey’s “Voting Party” Show, Cameron Diaz stated, “If you think rape should be legal, then don’t vote.” Insinuating, of course, should President Bush be re-elected, women will be more subject to the likelyhood of being raped. (This lunacy was somehow extrapolated from the theory that another Bush presidency could be the end of “freedom of choice” for women.)

Whenever Hollywood stars and starlets crawl out of the woodwork to “get out the vote” by uttering their own self-perceived “words of wisdom”, such as Julia Roberts, speaking of President Bush, proclaiming, “He’s embarrassing. He’s not my President, he will never be my President”.

Or Alec Baldwin comparing the 2000 election with the 9-11 tragedy, when he said, “I believe that what happened in 2000 did as much damage to the pillars of democracy as terrorists did to the pillars of commerce in New York City.”

Or Leonardo DiCaprio lamenting “Corporate America” raping the enviornment.

What the entertainment industry is doing, is not just “getting out the vote”, but getting out the vote for the liberal ideology by courting the vote of those who do not possess the faculties to recognize outright fallacies and those who find it fashionable to associate themselves with the so-called “beautiful people”.

Karl Marx and Friedreich Engles, while collaborating on the Communist Manifesto, coined a term for such voters.

They referred to them as “useful idiots”.

2

“Useful idiots” believe noble lies.

3

Not that I disagree necessarily (and frankly, I tend to agree with the Baldwin quote) , but does not the same thing happen on the other side?

Go into any conservative church, gun club, or listen to talk radio (as a more direct parallel to your entertainment example), and I doubt that you’ll hear republicans trying to motivate people to vote using sweet reason.

4

Yes, that’s very stupid if they actually said those things. But at least this stupidity didn’t actually come from official party headquarters, like
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/24/politics/main645393.shtml

"Campaign literature mailed by the Republican National Committee warns voters in two states that the Bible will be prohibited and men will marry men if “liberals” win in November. "

There’s idiotic individuals in both parties like the ones in the OP. You can’t expect everybody in every party to be sane. But you can at least hope the leaders don’t pull the same bullshit.

Oh, and feel free to point out similar things from the official Democractic party headquarters. Wouldn’t surprise me much if they pulled something similar.

5

That’s a terrible thing to say about the voters who elected the governor of California.

6

Actually, I’m pretty sure that was Lenin, not Marx and Engels.

7

As the latest PIPA poll shows, George Bush seems to have a strong lock on the stupid vote (or, more precisely, “ignorant vote”). If I were Kerry, I’d pretty much be writing it off.

8

Here we go. Again.

Yes, some liberals are idiots – look how long the left refused to admit that Alger Hiss was funnelling info to the Soviets! And Barbra Streisand’s keen intellect was revealed as she repeated e-mail glurge about President Bush and the word patriotism. Kerry would have us believe that we can (and should!) pay for health care for everyone at no cost to anyone earning under $200K.

Meanwhile, on the right, McCarthy accused anyone he didn’t like of being a Communist and people bought it, Nixon instituted wage and price freezes as a “conservative,” and the Bush administration continues to hope that people equate Iraq with 9/11. Seems to me they’ve courted the idiot vote as well over the years.

Look, idiots are a powerful – perhaps the most powerful - voting bloc. But they don’t seem to be consistently leaning in any particular direction.

9

Both sides go for as many votes as they can possibly get. And both sides use cheap rhetoric to make political points. Are you saying that Republicans would turn away any “idiot voters” that came its way? And as far as Hollywood goes, Bush is sure trying use Arnold on the campaign trail as much as he (Arnold) is willing to do so. I happen to think Arnold talks a good line. That he gave a great speech at the convention and I wouldn’t put him in the same category as Babs, but Bush is still looking for the photo op connection: If you like the Terminator, vote for ME.

10

After reading Bricker and John Mace’s posts, I’ll add that I was being a bit facetious in claiming that Bush has a lock on the ignorant vote. I am sure that there is plenty of ignorance to go around on all sides, although I don’t think it is necessarily distributed evenly and, in fact, I think the PIPA poll makes a strong case that it is not, at least in regards to the issues that they chose to look at…which were mainly (entirely?) Iraq and other foreign policy / foreigner’s-perceptions issues.

11

What’s up for debate here? Is it that Hollywood Democrats are bad? Is it that the powers that be should refrain from using celebrity to their advantage? Is it that “useful idiots” buy into what they hear with nary a thought?

To me, this seems more like a (weak) pitting than anything…

12

I blame all this stupid voter thing on Nader’s inability to compete on the TV debates.

Had he been able to appear, all the stupid voters across the spectrum would have surely seen him as most like them. Bush and Kerry would now be competing for the coverted “I exceeded the margin of error” prize that Nader got last time, but may not this election.

13

Yes, as we all know, liberals and only only liberals exaggerate issues for political effect. What’s more, liberals and only liberals have insufficient mental capacity to recognize these exaggerations. Finally, anyone who states political opinions that Razorsharp happens to disagree with are not stating their own opinions, but taking orders from some sort of ideological politburo.

In the extensive library of ridiculous assertions by this particular poster, these stand out as particularly absurd.

14

Right after the Apathetic voting block. Of course, there’s some overlap of the two.

At least there’s that

15

Are you sure this is an industry thing and not a case of individuals who happen to be entertainers?

What of those who support non-liberal ideologies? Do they use different tactics, or do they too court “the vote of those who do not possess the faculties to recognize outright fallacies and those who find it fashionable to associate themselves with the so-called ‘beautiful people’.”

Quite a number of people have coined terms for idiots.
Given the very large number of choices, why did you choose to use these two fellas for your example?

16

(1) Bush has a commercial running basically telling people that if they vote for Kerry they’ll be eaten by wolves.

(2) But someone who believes that Bush is an embarassment and a terrible president is an idiot.

:dubious:

17

That one happens to be true, Raz.

That too. Not good examples.

18

You’re right, I stand corrected. (Not that far off the mark though.)

Don;t know for sure, but sometimes I get the feeling that some of the opinions that come from the mouths of certain starlets, didn’t originate in their own brains, but were planted there from outside sources.

Gee, I don’t know. It was just the first thing that popped into my mind.

Or, perhaps it was because the Right often refers to those on the Left as “commies”. You know, the same way that the Left often refer to those on the Right as facists.

Funny thing though, being that minimum-wage laws are a pet of the Left, the moniker of facist is also more apropos for the political Left.

19

There is nothing “fascist” about minimum-wage laws, Raz. What alternate universe of discourse are you posting from?

20

Rant

Pronunciation: 'rant
Function: verb
Etymology: obsolete Dutch ranten, randen
intransitive senses
1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2 : to scold vehemently
transitive senses : to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion
Debate

Pronunciation: di-'bAt, dE-
Function: noun
: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides