If you are only listening to corporate media presentations you would be left thinking the political strategy of Democrats against President Trump is working.
Except you would be wrong.
While the overwhelming majority of corporate media punditry and opinion broadcasts paint a picture of President Trump and the larger republican/deplorable party in retreat, the actual data, outside the influence of media, shows a completely divergent truth.
The Democrats are in serious trouble; and it’s only getting worse.
The latest self-admissions by the larger American electorate on Party Affiliation show the number of people identifying as Democrat has slipped to 28%. That matches the lowest number of registered democrats recorded in the past decade.
For comparison, in November 2016, just before the presidential election, the number of registered voters identifying as Democrat was 31%. Conversely the number of registered voters identifying as Republican is also 28%. However, that’s actually an increase of one point from November when the number was 27%.
However, party affiliation only represents one small part of the data dynamic.
A larger, and significantly more consequential data point, is the amount of money being raised by Democrats and Republicans. One would think, against the backdrop of the narrative pushed by the media, that Democrats would be swimming in anti-Trump cash.
Except they are not.
Not even close.
Politico recently sounded the alarm noting that contributions to the Democrat party are half of the amount taken in by the Republican party:
[…] The party has a serious fundraising crisis.
Over the first six months of 2017, the Republican National Committee pulled in $75 million—nearly twice as much money as the Democratic National Committee, which raised $38 million.
The predicament isn’t simply that there is a funding gap between the parties; it’s what kind of money they attract. Republicans have quietly taken a decisive edge over Democrats when it comes to small-dollar fundraising.
During that same six-month time span, the RNC raised $33 million in small contributions—money from people who donate $200 or less over an election cycle—while that same class of donors gave the DNC just $21 million.
This isn’t just about money. Small-dollar donors are an important measure of how much grass-roots enthusiasm a campaign or organization has.
They are the supporters who will show up to knock on doors, make phone calls and get out the vote. And since they don’t donate enough to reach campaigns’ individual contribution limits, you can return to ask them for money time and again—which frees campaigns from continually being on the hunt for new, deep-pocketed donors who can max out.
The lack of their support threatens to prevent major gains by the party in 2018 and beyond. (link)
Additionally, the significance of the “small donor” contribution disparity is much more consequential than the semi-white-washed Politico analysis.
You might remember our calling attention to the “Record Breaking” small donor fundraising that Candidate Donald Trump achieved in the 2016 election.
The number of the small donors was so seismic in shift to the history of the RNC it actually became the inflection point where Chairman Reince Priebus and Communications Head Sean Spicer realized candidate Trump was the future. The majority future.
Data is power; and the scale of the small donor list generated by candidate Trump was like nothing the Republican party had seen in the entire history of the Republican party. And, even more stunningly, Donald Trump had achieved this feat in only a few short months.
As an example, in June 2016 Presidential Candidate Donald Trump had over 400,000 SMALL DONOR contributions IN A SINGLE MONTH. That’s 400,000 people each giving under $200. Bigly. Candidate Trump, now President Trump, gained more small donors in a few short months than the entire Republican party had assembled in the past eight years (four election cycles) COMBINED.
According to the latest financial data as provided by Politico, not exactly a right-wing-spin-machine, despite the constant, daily, 24/7 barrage of attacks against President Trump, the scale of support is still just as strong.
How does that factual data square against the media narrative? Short answer, it doesn’t. It doesn’t because the media narrative is what’s false. The narrative is what’s subjective and therefore subjective to the corporate media spin.
A way to explain to your friends and family.
Think of yourself taking your small circle of friends to an empty football stadium. While they take a seat you walk out to the middle of the field and place a dime on the 50-yard-line. Upon return to your seat you turn to your friends and say:
“you see that dime on the fifty yard line? That represents the entirety of the corporate media who tell you what is going on.”
“You see the scale of the rest of the field in comparison to that dime? Well, that’s the scale of the consuming pubic who have access to alternate media resources, beyond those espoused by voices represented under the media’s dime.”
“Now can you see how perspectives from under the media dime can be so out of touch with the reality of the geography?”
“Dear Mitch and Paul,”…