Connect with us

Opinions

Ads regarding Kavanaugh are about narrative first, confirmation second

Published

on

Ads regarding Kavanaugh are about narrative first confirmation second

Let’s face it. If you ask 100 random people on the street who Brett Kavanaugh is, only a handful would know. Chances are those who recognize the name have seen him on television ads run by groups supporting or opposing his nomination to the Supreme Court.

Such is the nature of Supreme Court politics today. In a society that’s always connected, it’s amazing how minuscule the people’s connection is to a major political event such as the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice who may make it possible for an originalist adherence to the Constitution. This is the most important confirmation battle in decades.

That’s why there are so many ads, right? No, not really. Kavanaugh’s nomination battle on the airwaves is simply a vehicle for the left and the right to drive their narratives. It’s a way to get funds from people in the know so these groups can do little to inform the masses that are not in the know.

The numbers are astounding:

Liberals crushed in SCOTUS spending war

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/20/scotus-spending-fight-kavanaugh-liberals-784530“Our budget for Gorsuch was 10 million [dollars],” said Carrie Severino, JCN’s chief counsel. “And we expect we will meet or surpass that given how contentious we have seen things becoming so far.”

JCN, founded in 2005, is one of four groups on the right bombarding swing-state Democrats with television ads in recent weeks. The conservative groups convene regularly for conference calls to update one another and coordinate their efforts and have launched a bus tour and phone banks, and otherwise pledged resources to the effort.

The pressure tactics used on Senators in swing states, both Democrats and moderate Republicans, is definitely intended to try to push them towards or away from confirmation, but there’s much more to it than that. Most of the Senators who are subjects of the ads are up for reelection this year. It’s a two-edged sword; they get attacked to weaken them without the money spent doing so being attributed to the opposition’s campaign. If they pledge to confirm Kavanaugh, the attack ads will be pulled. If they don’t pledge to confirm, the ads will continue to hurt their reelection chances.

Win-win.

If we look more closely at the tactics and messages being used, we’ll see something interesting. It’s much more about promoting a narrative than supporting or opposing Kavanaugh’s confirmation. He’s a narrative vehicle. At the heart are the two primary court-based narratives, guns and abortion.

Let’s look at the ads run by two powerful groups for each topic, the NRA and NARAL:

It’s no surprise that these groups would frame the narrative surrounding Kavanaugh’s confirmation around the topics they hold dear, but it’s important to note that neither actually talk about Kavanaugh himself. They use clips of other people threatening to attack their position rather than looking at Kavanaugh himself. Why? Narrative.

Supreme Court nominations are second only to presidential campaigns when it comes to getting people to open their pocketbooks. The finality of Supreme Court decisions makes the stakes appear to be extremely high, which they are, and this sense of urgency is prime time for collecting donations to push their overall narrative.

It is highly unlikely any Senators will be swayed by the calls being prompted by these groups. It’s possible elections can be swayed, though. At the end of the day, these groups hope to get more people on board with their message. They know Kavanaugh’s confirmation is out of their hands, but that won’t stop them from raising funds around him.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Media

Liz Wheeler on the most disgusting part of the Jussie Smollett scandal

Published

on

Liz Wheeler on the most disgusting part of the Jussie Smollett scandal

There are plenty of things about the Jussie Smollett scandal that should disgust us. The instant reaction by celebrities, politicians, and the media is right there at the top, especially when we consider how many are now saying, “let’s wait for the facts.” The notion that a successful gay black man thought it appropriate to make himself seem like a victim is also up there.

As One America News Network’s Liz Wheeler points out, we should also be disgusted that Smollett chose this victim status over being a strong leader and role model for less privileged black and gay people who could have looked up to him for his strength instead of now being scornful of his weakness.

What does that say about America when the left tries so hard to build the narrative that everything is wrong, they’re unwilling to recognize the real problems that are plaguing America. Why? Because they’re the biggest part of the problem.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Democrats

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

Published

on

Leftist media pushes back on Green New Deal criticism

It’s been an up-and-down couple of weeks for proponents of the Green New Deal. Before details were released, it was already being heralded as the greatest thing since President Obama’s election. Then, the details came out and even many on the left were taken aback by the ambitious and incoherent provisions of the deal as detailed in a FAQ section on Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s government web page.

But that was just a draft. They took it down. At least that was the story.

Unfortunately for proponents, they were caught a little flat-footed as questions started pouring in about, well, all of it. Even if we dismiss the less-draconian concepts such as eliminating air travel or the less-sane ideas like taking care of those who are unwilling to work, the left is still stuck with a proposal that the most frugal estimates put at costing around $7 trillion while other’s consider the decade-long cost to be in the HUNDREDS of trillions of dollars.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There’s not enough money in the entire world to pay for the proposal if its cost is somewhere between the lowest and highest estimates, but that hasn’t stopped leftist media from regrouping. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, they’re doing everything they can to recommit to this concept. It’s not that they suddenly believe in this fairy tale. It’s that they don’t want this to be the issue Republicans attack in the 2020 elections.

One article in particular that I read from CNN (yes, sometimes I need to see what the other side is thinking) really struck me for its honesty about the situation. Though I stopped reading it in paragraph two when it referred to “non-partisan” PolitiFact, I went back to it just now to digest the awfulness fully (see the sacrifices I make for our readers!).

To be clear, much of what this article says is correct. It asserts the GOP will take the tenets of the Green New Deal and use it to scare voters into thinking it’s even worse than Obamacare. From 2010 through 2016, Republicans attacked Obamacare incessantly and it worked, giving them the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014, and the White House in 2016. Unfortunately, they stopped there and didn’t actually go after Obamacare with the same fervor they held in their campaign rhetoric and now the Democrats have turned the issue on its head.

But here’s the thing. Obamacare may have been bad, but the Green New Deal truly is worse. It’s not even close. Even if we take at face value the notion that the Green New Deal is simply an ambitious framework around which real legislation can be forged, we have to look at the core issues entailed in order to see the true damage it can do. This is a socialist document. It’s a call for the same levels of insanity that drive the Medicare-for-All movement. Within its frivolous attempts to change perceptions of air travel, cows, and job creation is a deep-rooted desire to convert Americans to needing more government.

NOQ Report needs your support.

The Green New Deal represents the far-left’s desire to make more American dependent on government. At the same time, it aims to increase the levels of dependency for those who are already in need of assistance. It wants Democrats to latch their wagons on the notion that if we become a militantly environmentalist nation, that will serve the dual purpose of giving us fulfillment while saving the planet.

I believe most leftist journalists understand this, but they see in the ridiculous framework a path through which Republicans can be defeated wholesale in 2020 as long as the left can control the narrative surrounding the Green New Deal. They fear another Obamacare counterinsurgency that would wipe out the anti-Trump gains they made in 2018, so they’ve adopted a stance that the Green New Deal isn’t as bad as Fox News says it is. Meanwhile, they’re doing everything they can to say, “look over here and not at the Green New Deal.”

The politics behind what the Green New Deal represents is more in play than the tenets of the proposal itself, at least in the eyes of leftist media. It’s not that they want to promote the concept. They simply don’t want the concept to derail their party in the next election.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as ‘sweetheart,’ prompting zero outrage

Published

on

Louis Farrakhan refers to Ilhan Omar as sweetheart prompting zero outrage

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan referred to Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) as “Sweetheart” as he addressed her during a speaking engagement on Sunday. He apparently caught his faux pas and immediately justified the remark, but at that point the moniker which many consider to be sexist or misogynistic had already been noted.

Nevertheless, it didn’t cause the stir one might expect. As a far-left progressive, Omar is known for being a feminist icon on Capitol Hill even though she hasn’t been in office for a full two months yet. As our EIC noted, the lack of a rebuke was because of the source, not because she now feels it’s okay to refer to her as “sweetheart.”

The statement came as Farrakhan was telling Omar she shouldn’t be sorry for the statements she made last week about Israel, AIPAC, and Jewish influence in Washington DC, particularly over Republicans.

In a world where consistency was still considered a virtue, followers of Omar would be wondering why she’s not expressing outrage over the belittling reference from a powerful man. But the world isn’t consistent and Farrakhan always gets a pass.

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report