91Èȱ¬

Mr Westhead has a very valid point.

I've always maintained an interest in American politics and elections. Having lived there for a period as a child I feel quite closely connected to events there, and it does us no harm to keep a watchful eye on events in the most powerful nation on Earth. Let us not forget that America's local politics has a global effect.

Can that effect now change for the better with a revitalized Democratic party?

After years in the wilderness the Democrats finally have a chance to prove what many people have known for years. That they are the political party which best represents the people, the public interest. They now have a chance to show that the Republicans have lied to and manipulated great swathes of the American people for a long, long time. They now have a chance to prove that the Republicans are the party of big business, big business at the expense of the working man and the "family values" they purport to represent. The Republicans have no interest in the common man beyond keeping him down, keeping him quiet and taking his vote.

The Democrats are far from perfect. They too need big money to run their campaigns and they take it from sources not dissimilar to those dastardly Republicans. They are far from perfect, but they're a big improvement.

Now all they have to do is not screw up.

America has spoken and it's not just George W Bush who has to listen.

People want change. So don't morph into the new Republican party. Take the moral high ground, lead by example, be progressive, don't squabble and bicker for the sake of it.

The Democrats have been given an opportunity to reset the agenda. Let's hope they can.

And you're complaining because of the lack of a soundbite? Shouldn't it, in fact, be welcomed in an era where soundbite simplicity is lamentably all prevalent? Because problems and solutions are never more layered and complex! (But don't tell the media).

I think I quite disagree with Mr. Westheads leading question: Do the Democrats have a message?

You see, the thing is, all the republicans do have is a sound bite. What they need is substance. You can't reduce a whole political party to a sound bite and think it does justice to anything.

The republican party has been very good at turning out bumper stickers for the past few years but that's about it.

Unfortunately, looking at the Democrats does not feel very different than looking at the Republicans in most cases.

No wonder there is decreasing voter turn out in "developed" nations. Simplification and stupification of politics by the media for "fifteen second" clips dumbs down the debate (and the populace).

Why didn't you ask John Culshaw. I'm sure he could have come up with a most credible sounding 'clip' because after all he's probably learning some new voices as we speak...and as yet, we have no real idea what the new post holders sound like!

Everyone says we have a two party system but I think we really have three: Left, Right, and Moderates.

I don't look at this election as Democrats "winning" or Republicans "losing". In this election the Moderates won hands down.

I can't agree more with James on the issues about clear message and real action for the winning Demorats to work on and make positive changes as expected, otherwise, the table will be turned around next election.

The chance is here and what will be the next? Action speaks louder than word-The controlling party is in the hot seat until it proves to meet up the expectation of the nation. Normally, it is the case and it will be, always!!!

During a recent trip to the US it struck me that even amongst Democrat voters that there was no sense that the invasion of Iraq was wrong, just that it had gone badly. When raising the point that countries have to come to democracy themselves, that it cannot be imposed on them and in fact may not be the most suitable form of government for them at their particular stage of social development, I felt that this view had not been considered but was 'interesting'.

That said, I am always encouraged by the US democracy's ability to challenge itself and consider a different course. Compare for instance the openess and energy of Congressional committee's with our own stifling (e.g. Hutton) reviews and reports - even when the government deigns to allow the UK public access to information that it would prefer to keep secret. Wait now to see this system at work as the Democrats take over one or more of the Houses of Congress and wish that such vital self analysis could be seen here.

Do the democrats have a message? Do the democrats have a message that can be easily distilled into a persuasive fifteen second clip? These are two different questions.

The democrats may have in general, a strong and persuasive message that can strike a chord with American voters, however Mr Westland is correct to cite the importance of making this fit a soundbite. Campaigns should be about complexity and depth. However, for TV news it is very difficult to actually devote the time to reflect the various nuances and details of any stump speech etc. Practicalities demand concise reporting, so the material provided by the party machines must reflect that. As a clever TV show once said: “Ten word answers can kill you in political campaigns.�

I believe that your last paragraph hit the nail on the head. I am an American and have lived here my whole life. I am fed up with both parties.

I grew up in with a Father who was a democrat. The party he knew has moved so far to the left as to be unrecognizable.
They have no real plan for anything other then to convince the poor, that they cannot possibly do anything without government assistance, and that their only hope is to vote for the Democrats who will give them welfare. When they run out of people who belive this they import them from south of the border

The Republicans have turned the government over to big business, and big business is now the de facto government.

Neither party is doing anything for good for America. And in the words of Howard Beal, "I'm as mad as hell".

Yes, the republicans have been masters at framing the debate these past twelve years, but alas, their rhetoric is tired and no longer seems genuine. If I may paraphrase the republican spin:" "the big bad wolf is at the door. No its a horse! A cow! A goat. A big bad goat is at the door. I did not sleep with that goat. Though I was tempted."

Voting against the Republicans and not FOR the Democrats?
Absolutely.

This has become the mainstay of American politics!
If one can remember back to the presidential elections of 2000, it wasn't the people voting "for" Bush that put him in office. It was the people voting against Clinton ... and HE wasn't even running for office!

The same rang true in the 2004 elections. Not being able to win on any prowess that G.W. Bush had shown in office ... the Republican's rolled the "Clinton is bad and everything is his fault" excuse out of the closet, dusted it off and even shined it up a bit with some hatred toward Hilary. Once again, not overwhelming support of Bush but people AGAINST a man and his wife.

I suspect that the Republican's best hope for keeping the Presidency in 2 years, is to somehow insure that Hilary is the Democratic nominee. That would be someone they could energize their party to go out and vote against!

Glibness from Mr Westhead aside - some unfortunate nits will assume the lack of a 'clip' is a bad thing. Two points:
the political and global landscape is not susceptible to 15 second clips, the unrelenting goal of broadcast media to bring it in pictures, bring it fast, and 'dumb it down' for the overwhelmingly uninformed electorate, perpetuates the unfortunate trend to 'package' information and thereby transform messages in misinformation via oversimplification (the simple truth is that the Republicans have been infinitely better at oversimplification and misdirection because they view the american electorate as a mass to be manipulated with simple messages appealing to family values and leveraging the vague fear of terrorism - just have to listen to Karl Rove and Dick Cheney to witness experts in that cynical craft); second, a brief study of american politics over the last fifty years will reveal the recurring and predictable sentiment of 'throw the rascals out!' - some elements of the populace voting against Republicans rather than as an informed voter in favor of Democratic platforms and ideas is not a revelation -- this has been cycle that has been repeated and will again occur when the plebiscite determines it is again time to throw those rascals out.

Perhaps one of the reasons why the Democrats did not knock themselves out crafting clever little sound bites is because the American public is sick to death of them. We have become a sound bite culture with a sound bite government that has taken on massive problems with a sound bite approach. No wonder people don't want to hear the whole world get summed up in a single sentence anymore. Things are complicated. It's okay to take a minute or more to explain things.

Who says the 91Èȱ¬ is dumbing down?

I am horrified by this article. Instead of wanting, or even paying attention, to a cohesive speech the 91Èȱ¬ wants a 5-15 "clip" to sum it all up. The Republicans, and especially Bush, have done a wonderful job of saying nothing during speeches, indeed at times saying some horrendous things, but the media fails to pick up on it. Instead they all focus in on the witty one liner Bush or someone else produces at the end, often with little relevance to what has gone on before.

Congratulations Mr Whitehead! You are contributing to people being ignorant of policy, the issues and what is really happenning in the world. After all, people only want a 15 second "clip" don't they? After all the 91Èȱ¬ knows whats best for everyone!

Interesting that the inability of a journalist to find a nice 15 second soundbite (and a I prefer that term to clip) causes said journalist to wonder whether there is a coherent message to find. It causes me to wonder how we manage at all with such a malfunctioning media. 15 seconds is a meaningful period of time for whom exactly? I suggest only news editors who want to cram their shows (and the news is just another theatrical show) with losts of little bits. 15 seconds of time is a pitiful amount of time to cover crucially important issues.

It is difficult to nail down a sound bite from the Democrats because they are loathe to admit what they plan to do. Outside of a few minor feel good measures like raising the minimum wage, which will likely be vetoed by Bush without the use of byzantine procedures, and hosting Congressional investigations on Iraq strategy and finances while offering no solutions, most of their wish list is widely unpopular. They have done well over the last few years to hold back economic reforms as the the minority party, but have been mostly silent on their own plans. It will serve them well to keep the national conversation on the problems in Iraq and doing next to nothing on the domestic front. All the while, letting continued economic growth assuage any anti-incumbent mood in 2008. By then, they will perhaps have a sound bite that is palatable to the American people.

Mr Westhead would do well to realise that soundbites or talking points are often all that come from Republican politicain mouths. The Democrats are a very broad church with many individual thinkers. If he was looking for one overall snippet from the many speeches etc. that I heard last night it is that the voters voted for change. Given the state the US is in after several years of one party rule, the world will be content with that.

Personally, I am so tired of sound-bites. I wonder if the rest of the country just expressed the same frustration. I not sure I like the premise that now Democrats are in charge, they should adopt the same insulting, child-like phrases. Our problems are serious and complex. We will never get out of the mess we are in if we continue to chant simple phrases and avoid doing the work needed. (serious e.g. "stay the course") It is patently clear to everyone that the Bush/Republican establishment never cared about truthful assessments or effective policies. They just offered these "sound-bites" as if a quick, empty phrase would fix everything. I'd rather not "stay the course" with this sort of sham.

I think the clip that best describes the Democratic perty of today was first uttered by a Republican.

As Democrats we hope to usher in a new era of, "government of the people, by the people, for the people."

I just wanted to go along with you and say that yes, we didn't so much vote for the men and women for who they are because there are also some democrats who are just as bad as the republicans. We voted to get rid of the republicans. They have done nothing but hurt our country. The middle and lower classes have suffered greatly no matter what they say about new jobs and so on. A middle class person in this country who works at a job for twenty years and then loses that job due to cutbacks, has a very hard time financially. He or she can't go back to college because they don't have the extra income to pay for it but because they made too much money last year, they don't qualify for financial aid either. It has been a lose/lose situation long enough. I don't even know how George Bush got re-elected. No one that I know voted for him. I just wish that the people in other countries could understand that the American people are not to blame for what our leaders have done. I know that in most countries they hate Americans but they shouldn't hold it against us for what our leaders have done. I hope that now since the election is over, they will see that we are sick to death of what's been going on and are ready for some changes to be made.

"The truth is that if the Democrats win - it will be largely because people voted against the Republicans, not for the Democrats."

You state that as though that were some sort of profound revelation. That's how most elections are decided in the U.S. - voting "against" one candidate over another. Bush is president because (outside of stealing the election in Ohio, and before that in Florida) lot's of folks voted against John Kerry.

An increasing number of Americans are starting to pull back the wool that the Bush administration was able to successfully pull over their eyes by those very sound bites you reference. Constantly repeat those easily assimulated, unnuanced lies until they are accepted as the truth. Very much like what Blair did in your country.

Mr. Westhead:

As an independent voter in the "hanging chad" state of Virginia, I have found that the problem of simplified policies is not the issue. The fact that those simplified messages have little to no relevance to the issues that matter is the real concern.

None of the candidates in this election have challenged the immorality of US foreign and trade policy. They have limited their challenges of the status quo to the the "loss of American jobs" and the "death of American soldiers." It is as if the rest of the world is irrelevant.

What is worse is that the other side was part of the status quo (often unanimously) in maintaining the status quo. A good example would be one candidate from my state (Democrat - District 8) promising to "earmark the s***" out of legislation if he gets elected.

None of them have admitted that US economic policy has hurt the world. None of them has admitted that the unilateral approach the United States has used since the fall of the Berlin Wall (if not earlier) has hurt everyone. No one has articulated or even hinted that "the living large" American lifestyle is destructive and dangerous.

None of them has seriously tried to challenge the voters' behavior. They have, rather, chosen to focus on completely irrelevant and marginal issues such as gay marriage or become extremely xenophobic.

What is worse is that both sides have resorted to negativity after discovering that the distinction between them is negligible and that the moral and ideological integrity of their positions is shaky on a good day. One candidate in Tennessee (R - Corker) chose to attack the fact that his opponent (D - Ford Jr.) was "too pretty" after it became apparent that Ford Jr. was neither liberal nor elitist.

American voters, as was pointed out, voted for a change for the sake of change. I am sure that they would be further disheartened to find the same shade of green on the other side of the aisle.

I found this piece deeply depressing and an example of the incredibly low standards of modern journalism - no idea worth expressing can be put into a clip - perhaps the author should reread Orwell - I was thinking of 1984 and the description of bastardised and shortened languague in that (which is what he is looking for in a clip), but then thinking of Orwell's superb essays and journalsim it occurs to me that Mr Westhead might benefit from a wider reading of Orwell. (In fairness to Mr W I recognise that it is an industry-wide norm with which he was seeking to comply, but it is very depressing even so).

No, the democrats don't have a message-- not even enough of one to fill up 15 seconds. (Last time I checked, it only took about 2 to say "we're not George Bush"). This is the problem with the two-party system, which the framing of the country was never designed to support. Clearly the rest of the world wants the democrats to rule the US, but from my non-party view in Ohio, it's being stuck between a rock and a hard place. In both the senatorial and gubernatorial races (both won by democrats, which I'm not unhappy about), voters were stuck-- we were forced to choose between picking experienced leadership for ourselves and sending a message to DC and the rest of the world that we don't like the way the republicans have been acting. I hope the newly elected democrats will do well and do good. But the real message being sent is for the republicans to straighten up and fly right.

By me, one Republican soundbyte drowned out all other noise manufactured by the GOP: the giant sucking sound as our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and democracy in America went down the toilet.
What's not to vote against? As for the Democrats, they must now stand up and show some fire - as an informed and involved citizen, I listen out of both ears, not just one.

The criticisms regarding soundbites and clips appear to have missed the point of this article which is summed up in the final paragraph. This was as much a vote against the Republicans lack of humility and responsibility as it was for any specific Democratic idea. The soundbites that have come out this morning show that the greatest lesson of this election seems to be lost on many American politicians of both parties: arrogance by the party in office will not long be tolerated.

You must not be reading the right blogs. Of course there was a soundbite: Have You Had Enough? Check on YouTube for the really great song by the Squirrel Nut Zippers with Ricki Lee Jones. It was modified for progressive candidates all across the nation. Check it out, and read Firedoglake. You'll enjoy it!

Actually, the House Democratic leadership did release a detailed plan for the 'First 100 Hours'. But, blunder of blunders, the plan takes about 2 minutes to read through!!

So, being well beyond the average attention span of the average broadcast journalist, it might as well not exist.

Luckily for the Dems this time, the internet was used by activists as an effective unofficial tool, lots of slogans came into being in a sort of underground campaign - e.g. search Google for "Had Enough?"...

Now the net is doing an end run round many of the traditional media, parties can run campaigns on many levels and don't have to rely so much on getting the sound-bite through the broadcast 'boredom threshold'.

I'm an Amercian with a 91Èȱ¬ homepage, trying to escape 'sound bites' of our CNN / Disney type news converage. Looks like I will have to search further out on the fringes.

As an American, today I am completely ELATED that the Democrats have won one and possibly both Houses.

Although Democrats are accused of lacking a coherent message, I am of the opinion that they simply have not had the stage for the past six years (LONG, miserable years). Republicans have been crowding the microphone, trying to hold onto power through fearmongering, lies, corruption and devisiveness. Finally, it isn't working anymore.

To get a clearer picture of Democrats, all one has to do is listen, in non-"clip" form, to someone like Senator Barak Obama of Illinois. If one is too thoughtful and complex for a soundbite-oriented media (of which I was once a member), then so be it. Democrats now have their voices back, and I hope with all my heart that they don't cock up this opportunity, this gift, from their constituents. Now perhaps we can have a real debate and real answers regarding this horrible war and other issues that really matter.

Republicans do have the best soundbites:

"It happens not to be the area where Weapons of Mass Destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

Top that.

Thought not.