HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Do You Think Anybody In T...

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:11 PM

 

Do You Think Anybody In The Democratic Party Pays Attention To Voters Who Post Online ???

Because they should...

When they start the same old tired pablum in September... I think many will tune out.

Does the Democratic Party even have a person or two tuned into what's going down online?

Anybody know?


15 replies, 1285 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 15 replies Author Time Post
Reply Do You Think Anybody In The Democratic Party Pays Attention To Voters Who Post Online ??? (Original post)
WillyT Jan 2014 OP
BlueStreak Jan 2014 #1
russspeakeasy Jan 2014 #2
Fumesucker Jan 2014 #3
sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #4
LuvNewcastle Jan 2014 #10
woo me with science Jan 2014 #12
frazzled Jan 2014 #5
WillyT Jan 2014 #6
woo me with science Jan 2014 #7
WillyT Jan 2014 #8
El_Johns Jan 2014 #9
LuvNewcastle Jan 2014 #11
Douglas Carpenter Jan 2014 #13
mmonk Jan 2014 #14
Blue_Tires Jan 2014 #15

Response to WillyT (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:27 PM

1. Yes. Indirectly.

 

We know for certain that many of the "old media" (teevee and radio) shows source a lot of their information from the netroots. They don't have big research staffs, so they smartly pick up what they can from other sources.

And when the old media picks up on information that is creating a buzz online, THAT is when they take note of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:29 PM

2. Only a guess on my part, but I would say NO .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:31 PM

3. Other than to crack jokes about them?

No, not really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:31 PM

4. Yes, they do. But not as much as they used to. Back when most of them had no

idea what the 'internet was' they were blindsided by the calls they were getting from voters wondering how come all of a sudden the people appeared to be 'tuned in' to what they were up to. So they realized they better find out.

It's a long sordid story to those of us who watched it all play out and how a huge opportunity for the people was eventually undermined by some of the so-called 'liberal' blogs who sold out for access. No different than what happened with radio and TV.

Remember back in the early Bush years when some incredibly intelligent people took to the internet to express their outrage of what was happening? Many of us were attracted to blogs because of the writers who seemed to speak for us. We hoped that they would eventually be invited to the MSM to express their/our views on the state of the nation.

Instead, other 'voices' emerged who claimed to be 'liberals' but who spent their time slamming liberals. Suddenly it seemed that the original 'enemy' on the Right was almost forgotten and the fight turned to Liberals. Talking points were introduced to try to undermine liberals 'purity troll' 'concern troll' 'reality based community' etc and rather than those who actually spoke for us ending up with a wider audience, it was the 'moderates' see Kos eg, former Republican whose blog grew from a boring one page publication with few viewers to one of the biggest 'liberal' (excuse me for laughing) blogs on the internet. How did that happen while the bloggers who had attracted liberals to the internet were actually BANNED from DK if they posted there and demeaned, attacked and undermined?

There were many theories about how someone as boring and conservative as Kos became the media 'spokesperson' always introduced as 'liberal' rather than actual, life long liberals who were often banned when they showed up on that 'liberal blog'? How does a 'poor blogger posting from a tiny apartment move up to a million dollar home in a matter of a few years while those who actually HAD a following never made a dime? And how does a boring blogger that no one read, get promoted by so many other 'liberal blogs' and manage to get top Democratic Senators and Congress people to post on his blog? Enquiring minds have been trying to find out but he's not talking.

Someday someone will write a history of how we lost the internet as a tool. And who orchestrated the takeover and reigning in of all that liberal energy and mire it down in petty meta. I watched it happen as did others. So to your question, 'do they watch the internet', more than that, they influence it, they participate or their staff and operatives do, on the internet. But sadly I don't think they are afraid of it anymore, as they were initially.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 05:29 AM

10. It's obvious to me that powerful people care what we think and say on the internet,

otherwise they wouldn't be sending disruptors and others who try to guide opinions on media and opinion sites. DU shouldn't have to be banning all these people every day to keep the site working properly for the rest of us, but they do. There are certain people who always pop up in threads where certain topics are discussed in order to influence all the commentators and people who read these threads. Oh yeah, they care. They care a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 10:06 AM

12. Very interesting history about Kos. Thank you.

I have been interested by the many "sleeper accounts on DU that date back to its earliest days but remained dormant until recently, when they appear pushing Third Way/DLC/corporate talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:42 PM

5. Yes, but they also listen to voters on the ground

Voters who post online may not be fully representative of voters in real life. I know we'd like to think that everyone thinks as we do, but it's not true.

I've done a lot of groundwork in the past, both canvassing door-to-door and with volunteers in campaign offices. I remember back in 2004, coming back from weeks of conversations with voters in lower-middle-class neighborhoods in southern New Hampshire, and then going to some political meeting in my uber-liberal Massachusetts town. That's when it dawned on me that a huge gulf existed between the people who are most intellectually engaged in political discourse and real people in the world. I mean, the people in my town were all in it about the Bush doctrine and such, while the people on whose doorsteps I'd been talking were all about trying to get health insurance for a daughter who had cancer.

We may be more informed about what's going on politically, but we don't represent everyone out there in the Democratic voting universe. I think we have to remember that sometimes.

EDITED to add: Hell, we don't even agree about anything amongst ourselves here. So what are they supposed to take away from listening to us argue?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 14, 2014, 11:57 PM

6. Good Info... Thanks !!!

 

It's just that... we are gonna rely more and more on younger voters.

And they get most of their info online.

We start disillusioning them... then we have a major problem.

It would be nice to have a bridge...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 12:23 AM

7. Absolutely they do.

Last edited Wed Jan 15, 2014, 03:25 AM - Edit history (2)

Governments that turn authoritarian are obsessively concerned with public response to what they are doing. Right now our government has been purchased/hijacked by corporatists who find our representative/democratic system of government and Constitutional protections inconvenient to the predatory corporate/economic agenda they seek to impose.

The primary goal of any government implementing policies in direct opposition to the will of the people is to manage public opinion and public response so as to reduce the likelihood of pushback and revolt. Millions of us are being pushed into poverty, and our Constitutional protections are being stripped. Of course great attention and money will be poured into managing public opinion; disrupting, diverting, and dispersing gathering places for activists (both 3D and online); and creating the illusion that the people support what is being done to them.

That is why they pour money into a ubiquitous propaganda machine to replace the free press they are systematically dismantling.

Of course they pay attention to us. The propaganda is relentless and ubiquitous and creepily interactive, such that people who believe they are merely having political discussions with others online are immediately and relentlessly countered with corporate talking points and social manipulation/mocking/bullying when they challenge the corporate party line. And this has happened across the internet.

Yes, they pay attention. But the goal is not to listen to us so they can hear and represent us. The One Percent who now own both parties fear one thing, and that is that the country will wake up, realize our power and our numbers, and unite to stop their looting and hijacking of this country and our Constitution. Their goal is to divert, distract, divide, discourage, and disinform, and to prevent activism and pushback. They want to perpetuate the illusion that our representative system is still intact and functioning. Above all, they seek to keep us as quiet and passive as possible while they fundamentally transform this country for their profit and at our expense.


The goal of the propaganda is not to convince anyone of anything.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

The government figured out sockpuppet managment but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

The influx will continue
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting personas is steady and unnatural:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

Propaganda
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4264883





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 12:29 AM

8. I'm Having One Last Drink... And Going To Bed...

 




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 03:03 AM

9. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 05:45 AM

11. That's why we have this insane surveillance apparatus. They have to know all about

what we're thinking, saying, and doing. Only a manipulator is that interested in what others are involved in. It's all about control, and they are never satisfied that they have enough of it. That surveillance system was not built primarily to monitor people in other countries, although they do a lot of it; it's primary function is to monitor and control us. So yeah, what we say on the internet is of great importance to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 10:13 AM

13. indivdual posts - not much - over all outcries - have an influence, for sure

I recall how in 2008 - nominating Evan Bayh for Vice President was considered almost a done deal in some circles. The loud outcry from the Internet certainly played a role is stopping that by sending a message that rank and file Democrats would be greatly disturbed at the prospect of having to support a Vice Presidential candidate who was a supporter of the very same policies rank and file Democrats had spent the last eight years fighting tooth and nail against.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 10:14 AM

14. Obviously no. Only a few grassroots candidates or those

that want to form a base of small donors when running for office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Original post)

Wed Jan 15, 2014, 10:38 AM

15. One notable:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/~Alan%20Grayson

I could name a few others from past years, but I don't think they're active anymore....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread