Corporations Are People, My Friend
The problem is not complicated. Democrats are bad at messaging, and Republicans are very good at it. That gap is deciding what people believe, not just how they vote.
Republicans keep it simple and repeat it constantly. Two or three words, over and over, said loudly and confidently. It doesn’t matter how complex the issue is. The goal is not to explain, it’s to imprint. If people hear something enough times, it becomes familiar. If it becomes familiar, it starts to feel true. Republicans understand that and use it to perfection.
Democrats do the opposite. They explain, qualify, and assume voters will figure things out. They still act as if people are analyzing policy and arriving at the right conclusion on their own. They continue to overthink every issue and try to get people to vote against things. That is not how this works anymore or at least today it does not. Voters respond to repetition, not explanations. The side that delivers the clearest, simplest message, repeated the most, wins.
That mistake shows up everywhere, especially in media strategy. Democrats spend most of their time talking to audiences that already agree with them. Going on MSNBC/MSNow all day does not gain a single new vote. Not one. It reinforces what people already believe and stops there.
But even there, it’s important to be precise about what those networks actually are. You can argue MSNBC/MSNow leans Democratic. You can argue some segments push narratives or emphasize certain angles. But the people on those shows are not fabricating facts.
Look at the lineup. Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe was a Republican congressman. He is not inventing reality, and the show originally featured guests from both parties. But as the Republican Party has changed from traditional conservatism, the show has shifted more toward the Democratic side. Still, they do not lie to viewers. Nicole Wallace worked for the Bush administration, twice. She is not out there lying to people. Katy Tur may lean a certain way, but she is not fabricating facts. The same goes for reporters like Jake Sherman when he appears because these are informed, serious people, not propagandists making things up, aside from occasionally annoying us, like when Katy and Jake use gratuitous Phish references instead of keeping it subtle. But set that aside, they are not lying. Ana Cabrera, Chris Jansing, and the three hosts on the weekend and weeknight shows are totally Democratic if you will, but they never lie to anyone.
Ari Melber, a lawyer, does not lie on air. Chris Hayes whom is arguably one of the most analytically sharp hosts and smartest people on television, does not lie. He may be a total liberal, but he will never lie to anyone, let alone its viewers. Lawrence O’Donnell, who helped shape the fictional The West Wing and built his career on political writing, does not lie. You can disagree with tone, emphasis, or ideology, but there is a difference between framing a story and inventing one.
That distinction matters, and Democrats have completely failed to communicate it.
Because on the other side, there have been documented cases where false claims were repeated over and over again to a national audience, claims that ultimately led to massive legal settlements. And yet most people do not even know that. Think about how big that is, and how little it actually penetrated public awareness.
Fox News was headed for a catastrophic loss in a traditional courtroom verdict, it was therefore forced into one of the largest defamation settlements in media history after being sued by Dominion Voting Systems over false claims aired following the 2020 election.
Dominion argued that Fox knowingly broadcast false statements suggesting the company rigged voting machines. During the legal discovery process, internal communications from Fox hosts and executives became public. Those messages showed that several prominent figures at the network privately doubted or outright rejected the claims they were discussing on air, even as those claims continued to be presented to viewers.
That evidence became central to the case. In defamation law, it is not enough that a statement is false, it must also be shown that it was made with “actual malice,” meaning the broadcaster either knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The internal communications uncovered during the case created significant legal risk for Fox on that standard.
Rather than take the case to a jury trial, Fox agreed to settle. In April 2023, the company paid Dominion approximately $787.5 million.
The size of that settlement was notable not just because of the dollar amount, but because it reflected the strength of the evidence that had already been revealed. Settling avoided a public trial where additional testimony and internal details could have been exposed.
Despite the scale of the settlement, public awareness of it has remained uneven. It did not become a sustained, repeated point of discussion in political messaging, which is why many voters are only vaguely aware, or unaware entirely, of what happened and why it mattered to this day.
That is not because the information wasn’t available. It’s because Democrats never drove the message. If they understood messaging, that fact would have been repeated every single day, everywhere, until it stuck.
Instead, it disappeared.
What I’m saying, and this is my point, is that they have the world believing that MSNBC/MSNow, CNN, and similar outlets, which do not lie, are the ones that are “fake news” or dishonest media organizations.
This was not an isolated situation. A similar legal standard was applied in the Sandy Hook defamation cases involving radio host Alex Jones. Families of the victims sued after years of false claims that the shooting was a hoax. In those cases, courts found that the statements were not only false but made with reckless disregard for the truth.
Unlike the Fox case, those lawsuits did go through trial. Juries awarded damages totaling over $1 billion across multiple cases. While the final amounts are being worked through the courts and bankruptcy process, the verdicts themselves were clear: repeatedly broadcasting claims known to be false carries legal consequences.
Together, these cases establish the same underlying point. It is not just about opinion or political spin. When false statements are presented as fact, especially when there is evidence they were known to be false, the legal system can and does respond.
These are lay ups for the people that work in that Democratic Party.
And yet, despite the scale of both the Dominion settlement and the Sandy Hook verdicts, neither has been consistently communicated to the public in a way that has meaningfully shaped voter understanding. That gap, again, comes back to messaging. MSNBC/MSNow, CNN, and similar outlets are labeled as dishonest media, while those spreading false claims are the ones that have lost major legal cases.
Then, you have the Rudy Giuliani (Election Defamation – Georgia Election Workers) when Rudy Giuliani was found liable for defaming two Georgia election workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, after falsely accusing them of election fraud following the 2020 election. A jury awarded $148 million in damages. The case was significant because Giuliani did not meaningfully contest the facts in court, and the ruling reinforced that repeating false claims, even in a political context, can carry massive financial consequences. He even inferred that they were handling illegal drugs like heroin, for God’s sake.
The Smartmatic Lawsuits (Ongoing – Fox News and Others) are another voting technology company, Smartmatic, also filed defamation lawsuits over similar election-related claims. These cases are still ongoing, including a major suit against Fox News seeking billions in damages. While no final outcome has been reached yet, the lawsuits rely on the same core argument: that false claims were knowingly amplified to viewers.
Attorney Sidney Powell (Election Claims Sanctions), who promoted election conspiracy theories, was sanctioned by a federal judge for filing what the court described as frivolous lawsuits. She and other attorneys were ordered to pay legal fees and faced professional discipline. The ruling emphasized that the legal system cannot be used to push claims that lack factual basis.
What about the Donald Trump Organization (Business Fraud – New York)? The Trump Organization was found liable for civil fraud in New York. The court determined that financial statements had been manipulated to inflate asset values for business advantage. Penalties included hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and restrictions on business operations in New York. This case was not about speech or media, but it reinforced a broader pattern of legal exposure tied to misrepresentation.
Look at what happened to him, he got reelected, which again shows how bad the Democratic Party is at its job. Across these cases, the common thread is not ideology, it’s accountability tied to false or misleading claims presented as fact.
Let me make it east for the Democratic Party:
- Dominion → $787.5 million settlement
- Alex Jones → over $1 billion in jury verdicts
- Giuliani → $148 million judgment
- Ongoing Smartmatic litigation → still unresolved
- Powell → court sanctions
- Trump Organization → major civil fraud penalties
Individually, these are major stories. Collectively, they point to a consistent legal boundary: political messaging does not protect knowingly false claims from consequences.
I went through this over the last day or two when David Drucker wrote a piece that he promoted on Morning Joe, presenting it as some kind of revelation that ;Your Average Democratic Voter Isn’t a Left Winger’. My reaction was simple: who ever said they were, other than the GOP messaging machine that has been pushing that narrative for years?
Republicans are the ones who lump Democrats and liberals together, and that framing has stuck because it’s been repeated constantly. I even had a libertarian tell me that Democrats were liberals, and I had to explain that, in many ways, traditional liberalism is closer to libertarianism than it is to the modern Democratic Party.
What’s surprising is seeing even outlets like Bloomberg News buying into that framing and presenting it as if it’s new insight. It’s not new. It’s the result of years of effective messaging. This isn’t a revelation. It’s something that could have been explained much earlier without all the time, energy, and resources spent rediscovering it.
The people in the GOP spread it, while the Democratic Party never rebutted it, and therefore it sticks.
Again, why this still hasn’t landed politically is unreal to me. Despite the scale of these cases, most voters are only vaguely aware of them, or not aware at all. That is not because the information isn’t public. It’s because it has not been repeated, simplified, and driven into public consciousness the way political messaging requires. Conversly, Republicans repeat their message until it sticks and no matter if its a fact or not. Democrats present facts once and move on.
In today’s environment, only one of those approaches works. Now let’s dissect the Democratic Party and its scandals, which often seem to involve sex. Between JFK, Bill Clinton, and John Edwards, that’s basically the difference when it comes to lies.
If you come up with any of the Major Legal Cases Involving Democrats or Democratic-Aligned Figures, you have Senator Bob Menendez (Federal Corruption Charges), a Democrat from New Jersey, had faced multiple federal corruption cases. He was previously tried in 2017 on bribery and corruption charges (which ended in a mistrial), and more recently was indicted again on bribery-related allegations involving gifts, cash, and favors tied to foreign interests. This is one of the most serious ongoing legal cases involving a sitting Democratic official, though it is still working through the court system.
Hunter Biden (Federal Charges), the son of President Joe Biden, had faced federal charges related to taxes and a firearms violation. These cases have been heavily politicized, but legally they are personal criminal matters, not tied to government policy or media messaging. Some charges have been contested and remain part of ongoing legal proceedings. Michael Avenatti (Fraud and Extortion Convictions), once a prominent attorney aligned with Democratic causes and media appearances, was convicted on multiple federal charges including fraud, extortion, and embezzlement. He was sentenced to prison. His case became notable because of how frequently he appeared in media as a political voice before his legal issues surfaced. These two people were not in Politics.
Oh and former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (Investigations and Civil Issues) faced multiple investigations related to allegations of misconduct and the handling of COVID-era data reporting. While he was not criminally convicted, the investigations led to his resignation and multiple civil and ethical findings that damaged his political standing.
Again, the easy and key difference in pattern is a clear distinction worth noting, while the people that work in the Democratic Party have no clue how to deal with it:
- Many Democratic-related cases tend to involve personal misconduct, corruption, or individual legal exposure (and sex)
- Many Republican-related cases referenced (Dominion, Giuliani, Alex Jones) center on public messaging, media amplification, and false claims presented to large audiences as a way to mislead people or lie to them.
That difference matters depending on the argument you’re making.
The same failure shows up in how Democrats deal with political opponents and messaging from leadership. When misleading or false claims are made about the economy, gas prices, or foreign policy, Republicans simplify them and repeat them immediately. Democrats respond with long explanations that never break through. Or they call for hearings that put viewers to sleep for hours, while they end up taking the brunt of the criticism after each one.
Even now, you see it in real-world issues. Gas prices rise, narratives form instantly, and those narratives stick. My gas in South New Jersey is at $3.85 today, and granted, I drive a hybrid. The last time I filled up was probably three weeks ago, when gas was around $2.10 a gallon or maybe $180 a gallon. Regardless of the underlying causes or timelines, Democrats do not counter with simple, repeatable messages. They explain, and explanations lose to repetition every time. They need to say that gas is $3.85 over and over every day, including on Fox News.
They refuse to do the hard work, which means operating outside their comfort zone. Republican officials and surrogates regularly appear on MSNBC/MSNow and CNN. Tom Homan has been on Morning Joe at least two times in the last few months. Democrats rarely go on Fox News. If the claim is that they are not invited or are being ignored, then Democrats need to confront that directly and publicly.
They should be holding regular press conferences, daily, if necessary, stating clearly which Democratic figures requested to appear on specific Fox News programs and were declined or received no response. That lack of access should become part of the story.
They should also consistently highlight the fact that Fox News agreed in 2023 which is only 2 or 3 years ago BTW, to pay Dominion Voting Systems $787.5 million to settle a defamation lawsuit over false election claims. They should explain clearly that this was due to repeatedly airing false claims to its viewers, while also promoting the idea that outlets like MSNBC/MSNow and CNN are the ones that lie. That settlement matters because it followed the release of internal communications showing that some claims aired on the network were known to be false or lacked evidence. That is not speculation, that is documented.
If Democrats understood messaging, they would repeat that fact clearly and consistently while also making huge efforts to gain votes by going on Fox News. They would connect the denial of access with the network’s prior legal exposure and ask a simple question, what is being avoided and why?
Instead, they largely avoid the confrontation altogether. That is the core problem. They are not doing the work required to reach new voters. They are speaking to audiences that already agree with them. And that is not persuasion. That is preaching to the choir.
There is also a deeper problem Democrats refuse to confront which is that they assume voters will eventually “do the right thing.” Even after losing major elections, there is still this belief that people will figure it out and things will correct themselves.
They won’t. Republicans don’t wait for that. They shape what people believe in real time.
The last misconception is this: Republicans hold control of all three branches of our government, yet they have their supporters believing this is Biden’s and Obama’s fault. Within weeks of major geopolitical decisions and their direct impact on energy markets, the blame is still being pointed backward to Biden, to Obama, to Hillary Clinton. The Democrats do nothing about that odd statement that came out of JD Vance’s mouth today.
That only works FYI, because the message is simple, constant, and repeated.
If voters are still assigning responsibility to past administrations for current conditions without questioning the timeline or the facts, that is not a failure of information, it is a success of messaging.
Democrats are still operating as if voters are engaged, informed, and thinking through every issue. They’re not. Messaging works precisely because it meets people where they are, not where you wish they were.
That is why the Republican model works. It is simple, relentless, and everywhere. Democrats, meanwhile, are fragmented, reactive, and mostly talking to themselves.
If they were serious about competing, they would change how and where they communicate. They would try to get on every platform that reaches voters who disagree with them, including Fox News, every single day. The irony is that all they have to do is be prepared and be real, and it will work. That’s the irony. It should come easy because they do not have to lie. Lying is hard; being honest is easy. And if they were blocked from appearing on any show or segment, they would make that the story publicly and repeatedly. They would force the issue.
That is not happening.
Instead, Democrats complain about the narrative while refusing to engage where the narrative is actually being built.
And that is why nothing changes. That is also why the Republicans run circles around the Democratic Party in public messaging.
Until Democrats understand that messaging and not policy, is what drives belief, they will keep losing the same fight over and over again.
