Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Arizona
Related: About this forumWashington Times Surprisingly favorable article on Sinema
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/22/kyrsten-sinema-pulls-even-martha-mcsally-arizona-s/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1739 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Washington Times Surprisingly favorable article on Sinema (Original Post)
grantcart
Oct 2018
OP
elleng
(135,228 posts)1. Anyone in AZ READ the Washington Times???
grantcart
(53,061 posts)2. No, so I am wondering why they are being so nice to her?
Maybe they feel that they have to have a certain number of articles that reflect well on Democrats to try and show that they are impartial.
PandoraAwakened
(905 posts)3. Boilerplate Rethuglican Fundraising
From the desk of: The American M.O.B. (Majority Opinion Blowback)
"My American M.O.B. over the GOP-Russian Mob any day, any time...Let's roll!"
In answer to your question regarding why the Washington Times would print a supposedly "favorable" article about a Democratic candidate (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/22/kyrsten-sinema-pulls-even-martha-mcsally-arizona-s/):
This is actually a commonly used tactic to induce specific Washington D.C. PACs to send cash to a Rethuglican campaign viewed by local operatives on the ground as "in trouble."
Make no mistake about it, there are very specific D.C. PACs that are being targeted to read and react to the WT article. Those particular PACs will have tangential ties to the specific Rethuglican political operative quoted in the article, which almost always is the only person interviewed for "background" on the Democratic candidate.
Aides for the Rethuglican PACs are tasked to scan the right-wing rags for just such articles and if the name of the political operative quoted in the article is on that PAC's "heads-up" list, it will be walked right up to the top, followed by a money trail shortly thereafter.
Timing is also critical. The WT article follows on the heels of the conservative Arizona Republic newspaper (the state's largest) coming out in support of the Democratic candidate, which they rarely do.
So, let's analyze this particular article for the "tells" that give it away as a fundraising dog whistle:
1.) Headline about Democratic candidate is designed to capture Rethuglicans' attention and scare the bejeezus out of them.
2.) Sure enough, the only person quoted as to the "merits" of the Democratic candidate comes from Stan Barnes, one of Arizona's top Rethuglican political operatives. The framing of his quote is entirely boilerplate and follows "the rule of threes," a writing principle that suggests a trio of statements is most effective in engaging readers. Here's an analysis of Barnes' three-sentence quote:
a.) Set the Democratic candidate up as the smartest cookie in the room: She is perhaps the single best politician in Arizona today. This is code for: "HELP!" She's kicking our ass!"
b.) Follow with a set of 3 adjectival compliments (2 real and the 3rd underhanded, which is designed to lead into the final sentence of the quote): "engaging, funny, and mirrors people."
c.) End with a slapdown to convince Rethuglican donors that the Democratic candidate is so clever that she's able to pull the wool over everyone's eyes: "She makes people think she agrees with them, even if she doesnt. This is code for: "Holy shit! Even Rethuglicans are voting for her!"
3.) The remainder of the very short article will feature the main talking points being used in the Rethuglican candidate's on-air ads, which is what the political operative is asking certain D.C. Rethuglican PACs to help fund more of.
So, there you go, that's the answer to your question. I keep an eye on Washington Times articles during an election just to identify the boilerplate fundraising articles that tip the hat on which Rethuglicans are in trouble.
"My American M.O.B. over the GOP-Russian Mob any day, any time...Let's roll!"
In answer to your question regarding why the Washington Times would print a supposedly "favorable" article about a Democratic candidate (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/22/kyrsten-sinema-pulls-even-martha-mcsally-arizona-s/):
This is actually a commonly used tactic to induce specific Washington D.C. PACs to send cash to a Rethuglican campaign viewed by local operatives on the ground as "in trouble."
Make no mistake about it, there are very specific D.C. PACs that are being targeted to read and react to the WT article. Those particular PACs will have tangential ties to the specific Rethuglican political operative quoted in the article, which almost always is the only person interviewed for "background" on the Democratic candidate.
Aides for the Rethuglican PACs are tasked to scan the right-wing rags for just such articles and if the name of the political operative quoted in the article is on that PAC's "heads-up" list, it will be walked right up to the top, followed by a money trail shortly thereafter.
Timing is also critical. The WT article follows on the heels of the conservative Arizona Republic newspaper (the state's largest) coming out in support of the Democratic candidate, which they rarely do.
So, let's analyze this particular article for the "tells" that give it away as a fundraising dog whistle:
1.) Headline about Democratic candidate is designed to capture Rethuglicans' attention and scare the bejeezus out of them.
2.) Sure enough, the only person quoted as to the "merits" of the Democratic candidate comes from Stan Barnes, one of Arizona's top Rethuglican political operatives. The framing of his quote is entirely boilerplate and follows "the rule of threes," a writing principle that suggests a trio of statements is most effective in engaging readers. Here's an analysis of Barnes' three-sentence quote:
a.) Set the Democratic candidate up as the smartest cookie in the room: She is perhaps the single best politician in Arizona today. This is code for: "HELP!" She's kicking our ass!"
b.) Follow with a set of 3 adjectival compliments (2 real and the 3rd underhanded, which is designed to lead into the final sentence of the quote): "engaging, funny, and mirrors people."
c.) End with a slapdown to convince Rethuglican donors that the Democratic candidate is so clever that she's able to pull the wool over everyone's eyes: "She makes people think she agrees with them, even if she doesnt. This is code for: "Holy shit! Even Rethuglicans are voting for her!"
3.) The remainder of the very short article will feature the main talking points being used in the Rethuglican candidate's on-air ads, which is what the political operative is asking certain D.C. Rethuglican PACs to help fund more of.
So, there you go, that's the answer to your question. I keep an eye on Washington Times articles during an election just to identify the boilerplate fundraising articles that tip the hat on which Rethuglicans are in trouble.