This is right on, and I think it crystallizes the frustration of the last 12-15 years for “do something” Democrats:
“Jordan won’t be a liability to his party automatically; Democrats, using opposition tactics that fix media attention onto the controversy, have to make him one, or the press will get bored and move on.”
We’ve consistently missed golden opportunities to make news of Republican radicalism.
When McConnell blocked Garland, for instance, we should have brought the Senate to a halt. If the lack of any real action is a result of the widespread belief that Hillary was going to win anyway, the Judiciary Committee Democrats should have walked out of the Gorsuch hearings. And they absolutely should have done the same for the Amy Coney Barrett hearings. Instead, Republicans won major victories for an extreme social agenda without anything more than a ho-hum, the-parties-just-disagree-about-this-judicial-nominee news cycle. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but I think the spectacle would have helped set the table for judicial reform...or at least for even more public outrage when Roe v. Wade was inevitably overturned. I mean, what did we have to lose?
This is a more complicated topic, but, had I been Pelosi, I also would have begun Iran-Contra-style hearings about Trump’s manifold abuses of power as soon as the House changed hands in 2019.
The media ignored the wrestling scandal the first time around; SI just published a piece about it and ... snooze. Worse, some journalists are mocking Dems for calling him an “insurrectionist”--which he is! The beltway journalists tsked tsked over John Fetterman’s hoody but have nary a word to say over Jordan’s jacketlessness. His own former Speaker, John Boehner, called him a political terrorist who only tears things down. And you think if the Dems make enough noise, these same journalists will pay attention? Wanna buy a bridge?
It’s your colleagues who are helping the GOP usher in the ruin of our democracy. I know for you everything is the Dems’ fault. (If only they had such superpowers). Jordan will become the next Speaker because of the cowardice of his caucus and he will create chaos because it’s all he knows how to do. It’s an absolute disgrace and yet to the political media does not compare to the disgrace of Biden’s sneakers or Obama’s tan suit. And of course it will all be Biden’s fault.
What's interesting is the media DIDN'T ignore the wrestling scandal the first time around. It very nearly cost Jordan his career. I don't know if it would've been enough to tip the balance, but one ingredient missing the first time around was Democrats working to keep the scandal alive. As is their studied method, they sat back (or floated above, if you prefer) in the hope that mainstream news coverage would take care of the politics for them. So of course they absented themselves, Republicans decided they didn't care about Jordan's scandal, and the media moved on. It is absolutely true that mainstream news chases conflict, and that by sitting out conflict Democrats hasten media boredom with enormous GOP scandals.
You can grapple with that claim (really, a fact) seriously, or you can dismiss it falsely as another way of saying "everything is the Dems' fault." I sincerely encourage everyone to drop the defensive pose—Democrats don't need blind defenders—and view their methods with a critical eye and an open mind. It's the only way they can be encouraged to do better. Even if you think they're doing quite well already, why wouldn't you want a little more? Like, why would anyone argue "Dems SHOULDN'T make more hay out of Republicans coalescing around Jim Jordan"?! It makes no sense, unless the idea is just to defend them at all costs.
Whether we like it or not, showmanship is a crucial element of 21st century politics.
The Beltway media is generally cynical, craven, and often lazy. They will not amplify thoughtful speeches by Democrats. If Democrats want to be perceived as fighting for their base, then they have to be creative.
The 1/6 hearings were effective because they were carefully produced for maximum impact (thanks to Liz Cheney). It didn't detract from the gravity of the facts, but it was compelling viewing.
Jim Jordan is the human I hate the most. And I’m spoiled for choice! As an Ohioan, I think he represents the absolute worst of my state (again, there’s stiff competition when we have Frank Larose and Mike Dewine). The OSU abuse cover up, his clownish performance in every hearing, his complicity in January 6th and everything since. He’s scum, the worst of the worst, an amoral theocratic...poopy fart man who sucks.
If he becomes speaker, it might not be a bad thing in the long run. Maybe the world should see that not even five republicans had the spine to work with democrats. Maybe the world should see just what a psycho this guy really is. Jim Jordan is simply not likable--like, McCarthy was boring, but not actively irritating. If this guy becomes speaker of the house, it’ll put an even more unflattering face on the Republican Party.
Also! Loved learning about beat sweeteners and access journalism.
I initially blanched at the idea of inviting OSU abused wrestlers and Jan 6 police officers to Congress for the speaker vote. What first popped into mind is Trump's invitation to those who alleged abuse at Bill Clinton's hands to the 2016 presidential debate. Yet what bothered me most about that is the inference that Hillary was responsible for her husbands actions. The OSU and Jane 6 issues are specific to Jim Jordan's actions and inactions. So I'm warming up to the idea.
Dems should also invite people from the following groups that track legislative action.
Center for Effective Lawmaking
Lugar Center and the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University
Common Ground Committee
Since Dems want to govern for all while Reps are all about gaining/retaining power for the sake of corporations and the wealthy, anything that Dems can do to promote the existence and efficacy of these groups would be beneficial in the long run.
How many of the wrestlers Jordan enabled that sick doctor to molest, were 17? How bright is the line, really, between pedophilia and molesting an 18 year old?
Launch period (when everything is free to all readers) comes to an end after this week. Phase 2 is when most of the stuff on Off Message is only available in full to paid subscribers.
I wish the democrats would do what you suggested. It's unlikely though. They still play by the civility rules to appeal to so called independents.
Thanks for providing the transcript!
This is right on, and I think it crystallizes the frustration of the last 12-15 years for “do something” Democrats:
“Jordan won’t be a liability to his party automatically; Democrats, using opposition tactics that fix media attention onto the controversy, have to make him one, or the press will get bored and move on.”
We’ve consistently missed golden opportunities to make news of Republican radicalism.
When McConnell blocked Garland, for instance, we should have brought the Senate to a halt. If the lack of any real action is a result of the widespread belief that Hillary was going to win anyway, the Judiciary Committee Democrats should have walked out of the Gorsuch hearings. And they absolutely should have done the same for the Amy Coney Barrett hearings. Instead, Republicans won major victories for an extreme social agenda without anything more than a ho-hum, the-parties-just-disagree-about-this-judicial-nominee news cycle. Maybe we would have lost anyway, but I think the spectacle would have helped set the table for judicial reform...or at least for even more public outrage when Roe v. Wade was inevitably overturned. I mean, what did we have to lose?
This is a more complicated topic, but, had I been Pelosi, I also would have begun Iran-Contra-style hearings about Trump’s manifold abuses of power as soon as the House changed hands in 2019.
This is why Off Message exists, and I'm thrilled you see things this way.
The media ignored the wrestling scandal the first time around; SI just published a piece about it and ... snooze. Worse, some journalists are mocking Dems for calling him an “insurrectionist”--which he is! The beltway journalists tsked tsked over John Fetterman’s hoody but have nary a word to say over Jordan’s jacketlessness. His own former Speaker, John Boehner, called him a political terrorist who only tears things down. And you think if the Dems make enough noise, these same journalists will pay attention? Wanna buy a bridge?
It’s your colleagues who are helping the GOP usher in the ruin of our democracy. I know for you everything is the Dems’ fault. (If only they had such superpowers). Jordan will become the next Speaker because of the cowardice of his caucus and he will create chaos because it’s all he knows how to do. It’s an absolute disgrace and yet to the political media does not compare to the disgrace of Biden’s sneakers or Obama’s tan suit. And of course it will all be Biden’s fault.
What's interesting is the media DIDN'T ignore the wrestling scandal the first time around. It very nearly cost Jordan his career. I don't know if it would've been enough to tip the balance, but one ingredient missing the first time around was Democrats working to keep the scandal alive. As is their studied method, they sat back (or floated above, if you prefer) in the hope that mainstream news coverage would take care of the politics for them. So of course they absented themselves, Republicans decided they didn't care about Jordan's scandal, and the media moved on. It is absolutely true that mainstream news chases conflict, and that by sitting out conflict Democrats hasten media boredom with enormous GOP scandals.
You can grapple with that claim (really, a fact) seriously, or you can dismiss it falsely as another way of saying "everything is the Dems' fault." I sincerely encourage everyone to drop the defensive pose—Democrats don't need blind defenders—and view their methods with a critical eye and an open mind. It's the only way they can be encouraged to do better. Even if you think they're doing quite well already, why wouldn't you want a little more? Like, why would anyone argue "Dems SHOULDN'T make more hay out of Republicans coalescing around Jim Jordan"?! It makes no sense, unless the idea is just to defend them at all costs.
I agree with your take in this instance.
Whether we like it or not, showmanship is a crucial element of 21st century politics.
The Beltway media is generally cynical, craven, and often lazy. They will not amplify thoughtful speeches by Democrats. If Democrats want to be perceived as fighting for their base, then they have to be creative.
The 1/6 hearings were effective because they were carefully produced for maximum impact (thanks to Liz Cheney). It didn't detract from the gravity of the facts, but it was compelling viewing.
Jim Jordan is the human I hate the most. And I’m spoiled for choice! As an Ohioan, I think he represents the absolute worst of my state (again, there’s stiff competition when we have Frank Larose and Mike Dewine). The OSU abuse cover up, his clownish performance in every hearing, his complicity in January 6th and everything since. He’s scum, the worst of the worst, an amoral theocratic...poopy fart man who sucks.
If he becomes speaker, it might not be a bad thing in the long run. Maybe the world should see that not even five republicans had the spine to work with democrats. Maybe the world should see just what a psycho this guy really is. Jim Jordan is simply not likable--like, McCarthy was boring, but not actively irritating. If this guy becomes speaker of the house, it’ll put an even more unflattering face on the Republican Party.
Also! Loved learning about beat sweeteners and access journalism.
The fact that Jordan can't stop himself from screaming about everything seems...suboptimal for Republicans.
lol right? I mean if anything he’ll be a DNC campaign ad content cow
I initially blanched at the idea of inviting OSU abused wrestlers and Jan 6 police officers to Congress for the speaker vote. What first popped into mind is Trump's invitation to those who alleged abuse at Bill Clinton's hands to the 2016 presidential debate. Yet what bothered me most about that is the inference that Hillary was responsible for her husbands actions. The OSU and Jane 6 issues are specific to Jim Jordan's actions and inactions. So I'm warming up to the idea.
Dems should also invite people from the following groups that track legislative action.
Center for Effective Lawmaking
Lugar Center and the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University
Common Ground Committee
Since Dems want to govern for all while Reps are all about gaining/retaining power for the sake of corporations and the wealthy, anything that Dems can do to promote the existence and efficacy of these groups would be beneficial in the long run.
How many of the wrestlers Jordan enabled that sick doctor to molest, were 17? How bright is the line, really, between pedophilia and molesting an 18 year old?
Weeks or months? How about 4 days: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2023/jim-jordan/
"It could also be perilous for the GOP." It is devoutly to be wished.
Your suggestion of putting the sex abuse victims in the gallery is a good one. There was supposed to be a trial. Whatever happened to that?
Brian,
How do you feel about comments to your newsletter including quotes or hyperlinks to articles from other media?
Best
As long as it's relatively germane and tasteful!
What is "phase 2?"
Launch period (when everything is free to all readers) comes to an end after this week. Phase 2 is when most of the stuff on Off Message is only available in full to paid subscribers.
Hallelujah!