Share This Article with a Friend!


Assault on America, Day 70: Why Democrats’ shunning of Fox News will cost them in 2020

Democrats Fox News
Let’s review: Why did heavily favored shoe-in presidential candidate Hillary Clinton lose in 2016?

Pose the question to a Democrat and you’ll receive a quizzical look followed by a quickly spouted litany of rationales including Russian collusion, voter machine tampering, fraud, big corporate money, Citizens United, suppressed minority turnout (through voter ID laws), denying illegal aliens the franchise, backwards Christian evangelicals against abortion and feminism, oppressive male haters who couldn’t stand the notion of a woman being president, and, of course, due to half of Trump supporters being from the infamous “basket of deplorables” (meaning they’re “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic – Islamophobic – you name it”).

A conservative or Republican would reply, because Hillary Clinton was an immoderate unlikable wretch of a candidate who repelled and insulted people, haphazardly ignored and broke the law with her private email server, was contemptuous of normal Americans’ beliefs and values and gladly embraced the banner of hypocrisy, daring to criticize other men for poor treatment of women when she remained married to the ultimate adult female abuser, big bubba Bill.

Plus, she’s a know-it-all big government honk who dreamed of confiscating your firearms and controlling your life through unrestrained federal regulatory growth, surveillance and intrusion. She’s also a wealth confiscator and appeaser. And, Hillary would’ve appointed ends-oriented constitution-trampling liberal judges and justices to the federal bench.

In other words, there were a host of reasons why media networks projected Donald J. Trump as the new president in the early morning hours of November 9, 2016.

Political scientists and scholars still pore over the data to empirically determine the “Why’d Hillary lose?” answer. But one definite factor in Clinton’s defeat was her party’s utter rejection of a large swath of people who simply lacked an alternative but to vote for Trump. These discouraged folks live across the country in places the globalist world economy “forgot.” Their kids are the ones joining the military to fight the wars the politicians choose to wage.

They’re the forgotten Americans.

Will Democrats vie for their votes next year or dismiss them again? Timothy Carney wrote at The Washington Examiner last week, “The choice for 2020 is: Do Democrats prefer the pride of being the party of the elites, or are they willing to sully themselves by trying to win over the ‘backwards’ places full of deplorable bitter clingers?

“If they want to win, they need to tune out Hillary and the commentators who insist that Trump’s base was purely racists —the folks who declare ‘There’s no such thing as a good Trump voter.’ This will involve accepting that working-class suffering is real — even for white people.

“The data tell the story clearly. Life expectancy in the U.S. is falling, driven by a sharp decline among working-class whites. Labor-force participation remains low, and the rates of men on disability remains high. Working-class marriage rates are falling, and out-of-wedlock births are rising among the working class. Behind all of this are decades of stagnating wages. But there’s something more important at play here: the collapse of community cohesion and local institutions of civil society.”

Carney’s hit the nail on the head here. Democrats were formerly known as the party of the working man, the home base of mythical political heroes who’d battle the big business interests and combat unfairness to raise wages and make everyone’s life a little better by ensuring Americans were paid fairly for their exertions. Unions loved Democrats because they’d bend the labor rules towards their members and keep an eye on the greedy employers at the same time.

Little by little Democrats won over various coalitions which, when combined helped build majorities in many places. African-Americans swung to the party in FDR’s time and never left. Environmentalists appreciated Democrats opposing big business and gleefully regulating every inch of American soil. Greenpeace saved the whales and stymied the polluters. Limousine liberals in New York and Hollywood were so rich they didn’t care if taxes were astronomically high. They’d hire accountants and lawyers and move their money offshore. “Let them eat cake.”

But somewhere along the line the Democrats’ intellectual foundation eroded and disappeared. Instead of championing popular concepts like border security and law enforcement Democrats adopted an all-out race fixation. “Social justice” became the party’s mantra. Simple universal concepts such as freedom of worship and religion became taboo if it meant a tiny fraction of the party’s supporters would need to accept existing laws and customs.

Non-governmental institutions such as churches and the Boy Scouts bore the full brunt of this rapid societal denigration. Under pressure to change with the times, groups like Catholic charities were compelled to distribute birth control and girls were permitted to join the Boy Scouts (and gay men could lead troops).

In the nineties Democrats pushed the armed forces to admit homosexuals under the guise of “don’t ask don’t tell.” Liberals then advocated for erosion of traditional marriage. Legal “domestic partnerships” were no longer satisfactory -- it had to be full marriage privileges for gay and lesbian couples. Today, Democrats embrace “gender identity” and force “transgender-ism” on the military…including paying for their sex change procedures.

Many Americans rebelled. This nationwide backlash was never more evident than the 2016 election. Democrats acted dazed when voters rejected a third term for Barack Obama’s agenda. The swamp lost. Blame was swift and ferocious. Will Democrats learn their lesson this time and speak to the millions of people who rejected them to pull the lever for a first-time politician with poor presidential manners?

Not likely. To reinforce the point, Democrats just announced Fox News will not conduct a Democrat presidential primary debate. Reid Wilson reported at The Hill, “In a statement, DNC Chairman Tom Perez said he had held conversations with Fox News about potentially allowing the network to host a primary debate. But he said the story, published in The New Yorker, caused him to end conversations with the network.

“’Recent reporting in The New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and FOX News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, FOX News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates,’ Perez said in the statement.”

A Fox News spokesman said he hoped Democrats would reconsider, arguing there’s a large pool of undecided voters who regularly watch the nation’s number one cable channel -- and that network journalists Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, “embody the ultimate journalistic integrity and professionalism.”

Democrats’ Fox boycott demonstrates stupidity of the highest order, but is highly predictable where they’re concerned.

If Democrats were serious about intending to compete for every vote, why are they afraid to do it on Fox News? Each nominating cycle Republicans catch flak for scheduling candidate forums on every liberal network out there -- which is basically all but Fox -- and GOP elites even permit liberals to “moderate” the discussions. It’s how party candidates end up with questions like, “By show of hands, how many believe in the theory of evolution?”

Or Newt Gingrich being asked about scurrilous gossip to open a debate.

At the same time, if Fox -- or any news provider -- sought an in-depth discussion of the issues they’d have topics posed by people like Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham. Then you’d get sparks flying and voters would finally witness Democrats answering tough questions. Bernie Sanders wouldn’t get away with claiming climate change is the greatest threat to national security and that ISIS is only radicalized because of the earth’s warming.

Needless to say, some Fox viewers might see merit in the Democrats’ arguments. It could happen.

Both parties are guilty of pandering to their own bases, but Democrats consistently shy away from challenges to their strange belief systems. Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 because she arrogantly assumed she’d win; 2020 Democrats seem destined to repeat the same mistake.

Share this