Thanks so much, Kristoffer, for another informative, incisive essay, with lively figurative language. What I'm hungrying for now are some examples of language Democrats could use to counter specific, current lies the Republicans are keeping alive.
Willie Horton... and Dukakis in a tank. Fear v. foolish. Fear wins! If only feeble dems would take a course from you, Kristoffer.
Dems have such an easy fear story to tell that is actually factual: Republicans are harming your children as they protect pedophiles and child sex traffickers. The scary, but factual stories are endles. This weekend, the orange bloat fired thousands of special ed employees of the Dept of Education. trump and republicans are increasing the cost of health insurance to the point where children will not be able to go to the doctor and possibly die. SNAP is being slashed so children go hungry. The vaccine boogeyman now puts children at greater risk of death from once nearly eradicated diseases.
Why aren't dems making commercials on how republicans are protecting pedophiles and child sex traffickers? Why not sometihng like Day 150 of trump and republicans protecting Jeffrey Epstein child sex criminals. Day 151, Day 152... And not to mention the millions of children trump, musk, doge, and GOP are starveing to death by ending USAID to they can give billios to the insatiable money appetites of the mega wealthy.
Dems could pound the military pay card. They could say trump is putitng our military in financial peril by not agreeing with our pay the military bill. Seems simple enough to hit the Sunday shows hard. Ignore all questions and just say repubs are harming our military. Gop style.
While dems are trying to play at least remedial offense, they seem to fail to take the attack to republicans in a manner that is strong, and determined. At least they have gotten off their butts a bit./. Dems have the people behind them but can't seem to hit a stride. Sad;y, dems are quite dim when they need to shine.
Paraphrasing Twain, "A republican lie can travel around the world and back again while dems and the truth are lacing up its boots."
Cheeto: Americans Second….Billionaires and Investors First
Scott Bessent was a fairly average hedge fund manager before he became Cheeto’s treasury secretary, was heavily involved with Argentinian companies and his friends would profit with good news Enter Cheeto’s corruption once again bailing out the Argentinian government to the tune of a $20B loan Of note is that Argentina has defaulted 9 times in the past on loans So Cheeto just gave $20B in taxpayer dollars in a shady loan deal
This is on top of Argentina selling soybeans to China because American soybeans farmers have lost that market because of Cheeto’s tariff policies Will American farmers decide that a vote for the Nazis in the 2026 midterms is a bad idea?
Americans second…..Cheeto has decided to not give government employees back pay after the government shutdown Cheeto and his Nazi allies in Congress don’t give a shit about Americans….only billionaires The Nazi arrogance is astounding
Wow. Another gem of an analysis and writing that informs, motivates, inspires. Thank you. There are volumes that I’d like to say, but for right now, I’d like to emphasize two things:
1) When you asked the child about her fears you never once told her she was “stupid” or “delusional” or tried to convince her there was “no such thing as monsters.” The Democrats and we “woke” persons continue to do that or certainly imply that. Tendency to do that is understood in face of the fantastical lies and manipulation that we are faced with. But as you point out so eloquently, it not only does not work, it intensifies the fears, and the person “doubles-down” in their belief.
It takes work and compassion and humility to “start where the person is at,”as delusional and hateful a place as that might be; not in agreement with their stance, but the ability and willingness to be with it and counter in any way possible. And it often can be possible. A shred of cognitive dissonance may grow. The experience of not being denigrated in turn may be an experience someone has never had.
2) The “Southern Strategy” was/is such a powerful tool as it is based in the core belief in the mythology of a caste/race/class system that will fight to the death to preserve itself. That is what we are witnessing yet again as the “order” based in that mythology will go as far as destroying the Republic, fellow citizens, anything it takes to keep this “order” in power. This is what must be challenged repeatedly and continuously, particularly by those of us who have “benefitted” by its tenets.
The “Southern Strategy” was deemed so powerfully effective that early on in the Nazi take over of Germany, a group was brought there from the American South to act as advisors to the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews in a way that would be accepted by the German people. Think about that. How to engineer the “normalization” of horror. How to ensure that the “unthinkable” can become not only “thinkable”, but celebrated.
Dr. Ealy, I've now read your essay three times. You're talking about two separate failed Democratic approaches. One: ignore Republicans' monster because consultants say no one cares about it. Two: present data showing that the monster isn't real.
I don't see you offering an approach that would work. The obvious answer, as you write in the essay, is not to adopt the same monster and outdo the Republicans in painting its monstrosity. That's still not a prescription, let alone one for success.
But what about using fear anyway? Real fear of a real monster, not a made-up one. Millions and millions of Americans must have voted for Biden and then for Harris at least in part out of fear of Trump and what he would do. Even in the wake of Jan. 6th, pooh-poohing those fears was a lot easier a year ago than it is now.
How many of us are frightened? How many are heartbroken?
ETA, tip for parents/sitters: Small children will believe that you can cast a monster-banishing magic spell. Repeat three times: "Monsters, go home!" Pause. Repeat three times: "There are no monsters here." Pause. "Shazam. Abracadabra. Amen." It worked for my four-year-old, and I didn't even have a magic wand.
Beautiful story about fighting Rose's monsters. Imagined monsters hiding under the bed or behind closed doors are scary. I remember it well. Pointing out how the Southern Strategy has always been good in creating some monster lurking to destroy such things as women's sports or taking your job. Fighting these unreal monsters is hard, because you are correct, people like to believe in them--not realizing someone is just scaring you with something not real. Well, I must admit I tried to whack the trans monster out of conversation in the last election. One father I met while door knocking was just so sure that trans athletes were taking over women's sports. I tried to remain rational, but finally had to walk away before I yelled something like "What would you have done back when we were fighting for title IX...?" Yep! I had to walk away. Also, I wondered how I would have answered the question you put before your class when I was age 18. Or even now. I probably would have set there wondering, not critical thinking, what the right answer should be. Critical thinking takes work and understanding. Given lots to think about how fight the monsters that the Republicans and this regime are inventing. So good to read your thoughts and insights. Hope all is going well with your classes. Thanks, professor. Take care.
I believe the article is right on, but am unsure of specifically how Democrats "battle the monster." I used to watch MSNBC and read progressive newsletters. All you had to do was listen to Joe Scarborough's rants and that seemed to be confronting and battling the monster. The same is true for Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell. They were every specific and very strong. They appeared to me to be battling the monster as were Democratic politicians.
Harris certainly appeared to me be making a case that the Republicans were lying and directly confronted "the monster". She wiped the floor with Trump during the debate but it did not seem to make a difference.
Corey Booker did more than just talk, he filibustered and stood his ground on the Senate floor for hours. But it did not seem to make a difference.
Our country is divided because people get their news from sources that support their political positions.
I do think that what will destroy the Republicans in the end is that they overreach and that Americans will finally decide they have had enough. Trump's poll numbers are sinking to unheard of levels on even his prize issues, such as immigration. Job numbers are bad and inflation is as bad or worse than it has ever been. So I am cautiously optimistic that the Democrats will take back the House (gerrymandering aside) and win back the Presidency (that is, if Trump does not figure out a way to run again in 2028). If Trump is not able to or chooses on not to run in 2028, there is no one in the Republican Party that has his charisma and will retain the kind of loyalty that Trump has enjoyed.
Biden won because people had had enough of Trump. Harris lost because Americans, despite one of the best economies in the world, still believed that their lives were not getting any better under Biden and they were not familiar enough with Harris because, apparently, they believed that she had not been properly vetted and that there were other possible candidates that should have been given a chance.
I wholeheartedly supported Harris and really thought she would win.
The one big thing that the article does not address is the fact that the media companies that control the flow of information to average Americans is controlled by the Right. Sinclair and other big media companies control the flow of information. They reach many more people because they own the lion share of radio and TV stations across the US.
Those are really fair points, Richard — and I completely agree that battling a lie is so much harder than battling the truth. If you think back to the Biden–Trump debate, every other word out of Trump’s mouth was a lie, but because he lied with confidence, it came off as strength. Even many Democrats framed him as the “stronger” debater, which shows just how easily performance can overpower honesty in modern politics.
You’re right that people like Maddow, O’Donnell, and Booker have done their share of confronting the “monster,” but the challenge isn’t just confronting it — it’s sustaining the message once the monster changes shape. Trump, Fox, and the broader right-wing media ecosystem are masters of morphing the narrative before Democrats can even land the punch.
Battling monsters or boogeymen is only difficult when you refuse to deal with them head-on. Democrats often want to fact-check or reason their way through a fight that requires emotional clarity. Republicans create fear; Democrats cite data. One of those sells faster than the other.
The way Democrats should deal with these monsters is to stop assuming voters already know the monster is fake. They need to name the lie, mock the absurdity of it, and explain what it’s distracting from — all in the same sentence. In other words: fight fear with story, not spreadsheets.
And you’re absolutely right about the media imbalance. Sinclair and other right-wing conglomerates have made sure that disinformation has the loudest microphone in the room. MSNBC might reach a few million cable viewers; right-wing talk radio and local affiliates reach tens of millions daily.
So yes — Democrats do “battle” the monster, but too often it’s like shadowboxing while the monster hosts a nationwide tour. Until they learn to fight on the same emotional terrain without sacrificing truth, they’ll keep losing to fiction that feels realer than reality.
Apparently, Senator Schumer, doesn’t know what, to, Democrats are, in a, quagmire, of , not knowing what, to, do! Senator Schumer is , an, enablers who knows nothing about politics!
Thanks, Linda — I hear your frustration. A lot of what looks like “not knowing what to do” from leadership is really a habit of reacting slowly and prioritizing optics over offense. That’s how Democrats end up in the quagmire you’re talking about: chasing “bipartisan” cover, which too often enables GOP brinkmanship instead of calling it out and ending it.
On Schumer specifically: the instinct to manage the news cycle instead of frame it is a real problem. When you’re forever negotiating with people who are negotiating in bad faith, you’re not leading — you’re laundering their chaos.
And about the famous Schumer family — the Baileys. If he’d rolled out that story once, I could respect the bit. But at this point the constant shout-out to the Baileys is so unoriginal it’s become self-parody. It’s giving “imaginary focus group.” Voters need clarity and contrast, not bedtime stories we’ve all heard ten times.
Bottom line: stop enabling, set terms, and repeat the truth with the same discipline the other side repeats the lie. Appreciate you for saying it plain.
Thanks so much, Cristi — really appreciate that! I’m glad the piece landed with you. I tried to balance the critique with something constructive, and your comment makes me feel like that came through. Thanks for reading and for the kind words!
Those of us in marketing, advertising and sales have understood this for decades. Unfortunately, Democrats struggle mightily with the concepts you present Kristoffer.
Tell me about it, MGL — I come from a communications and advertising background myself, and I’ve been beating this drum for years. You’re absolutely right: people in marketing and sales have understood for decades that repetition, emotional framing, and message discipline are everything. Democrats, unfortunately, still treat persuasion like a debate club exercise instead of a storytelling contest.
The GOP’s messaging machine borrows directly from commercial advertising — short, emotional, identity-driven, and easy to remember. Meanwhile, Democrats often rely on policy PDFs and bullet points. It’s not that the policies aren’t strong; it’s that the delivery doesn’t stick.
That’s why I keep emphasizing that Democrats have to brand their truth, not just state it. The psychology of influence hasn’t changed — emotion sells, clarity persuades, and consistency builds trust. Until Democrats fully internalize that, they’ll keep showing up to a marketing war with a fact sheet.
All very true. Dems are so “pure” they don’t understand politics is a business, that needs to sell to the citizenry. Quoting relentless constitutional law does not resonate with busy lives.
This is an amazing column! It should be sent to EVERY Democrat in Congress, all governors - across the board. Thank you, Professor Ealy, for spelling it out so clearly. The story of Rose and the monsters is something that every human who has ever tried to get a child to go to sleep (even if you don’t have your own children - as I do not) can immediately grasp.
Thank you so much, that really means a lot. I’m glad the story about Rose resonated with you — I wanted something that captured how fear works in politics in the same way it works in childhood: it’s irrational, emotional, and contagious if left unchecked. The “monsters under the bed” metaphor came from that idea — that leaders too often lecture instead of reassure, and that fear, when repeated enough, starts to feel like truth.
You’re absolutely right that this isn’t just a political lesson; it’s something deeply human. Anyone who’s ever comforted a child, or even battled their own anxieties, understands that naming the monster is the first step to disarming it. That’s why I wanted to strip the concept of political jargon and frame it through something we all instinctively understand — storytelling, emotion, and trust.
Thank you again for taking the time to read it and for your kind words. Comments like yours remind me why I keep writing these pieces — to bridge that gap between political logic and human experience.
Excellent! And despite our knowing better, many of us need to do the same. Instead of ignoring that silly monster, fight it and beat the heck out of it - every day if we have to. Social media is a perfect example. Instead of ignoring the screaming monsters, shut them down and just slay the monster and be willing to take the heat. We have to stop ignoring the monster! Thank you Kristoffer Ealy!
Thanks, Michelle — totally with you. Ignoring the “monster” just lets it grow. The fix is daily reps and clear tactics, especially on social media. A few I use/teach:
1. Name it fast. Say the lie plainly once, then label it (“This is a scare tactic about X”).
2. Translate to stakes. “If this sticks, here’s who gets hurt and how.”
3. Pivot to solution. One sentence with the credible alternative and a link/receipt.
4. Don’t feed the algorithm. Screenshot bad posts instead of boosting them with quote-tweets; add context above the image.
5. Use humor, not cruelty. A crisp analogy or meme travels farther than a paragraph of rage.
6. Message discipline. Same 10–12 words every time; repetition beats precision online.
7. Localize it. Tie the myth to a local school board, clinic, or workplace so it feels real.
8. Team sport. Coordinate replies with friends so the first screen under the lie is facts, not boos.
9. Take the heat, then log off. Set time limits; don’t let trolls rent space in your head.
You’re exactly right: stop ignoring, confront clearly, and accept the heat that comes with telling the truth. Appreciate you for saying it out loud!
You’re right, Joe — history keeps proving that this tactic works for them. The difference now is that Lee Atwater at least understood it as a strategy. As much as I’m not a fan of Atwater, I’ll give him his due — he knew how to weaponize coded language to motivate a base without alienating swing voters.
The modern GOP, though, seems to have forgotten the “strategy” part of the Southern Strategy. The dog whistles have become bullhorns, and while that still fires up the hardcore base, it’s starting to alienate everyone else. The overt race-baiting and grievance politics might win primaries, but it’s costing them long-term credibility in general elections.
Look at 2024 — Democrats didn’t lose in landslides. We lost close races we should’ve won. The House majority flipped largely because of aggressive gerrymandering in states like Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana after the Supreme Court gutted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act. In raw vote totals, Democrats actually won more House votes nationwide, but district maps diluted those votes.
So yes, the GOP keeps running the same Willie Horton-style playbook, but it’s losing some of its potency. The demographics and media landscape have shifted — and as those tactics become louder and less coded, the backlash is growing louder too.
I think BF is right. The Senate can institute the “nuclear option” to pass the CR and end the shutdown. But Mike Johnson recommends against it and there are a few GOP senators who are also against it. Here is something I found about it in Politico:
That’s a good find, Summer — and I think you’re right that Johnson’s resistance says a lot about how performative this whole “shutdown brinkmanship” really is. Democrats often end up conceding arguments to the right, not because they agree, but because they’re so afraid of looking partisan that they hand over the emotional high ground.
I don’t think BF is necessarily wrong either — the GOP can act unilaterally in certain cases — but that’s part of the problem: they often choose not to, just to keep the public confused about who’s actually responsible. Republicans love to posture as if they’re being “forced” into gridlock by Democratic obstruction, when in reality they’re manufacturing the chaos to look like reluctant victims of their own mess.
Democrats could handle this better by framing it for what it is — not a debate over fiscal policy, but over accountability. The GOP creates these crises, then demands a participation trophy for eventually ending them. If Democrats called that play out every time instead of trying to look “bipartisan,” the narrative would flip quickly.
So yeah, you’re right — the nuclear option is there, the votes are there, and the obstruction is entirely by choice. It’s political theater, and Democrats keep letting Republicans write the script.
Thanks so much, Gordon — really appreciate the encouragement. I’ll keep at it and try to make this work as clear and useful as possible. Grateful you’re reading and sharing!
Thanks so much, Kristoffer, for another informative, incisive essay, with lively figurative language. What I'm hungrying for now are some examples of language Democrats could use to counter specific, current lies the Republicans are keeping alive.
Willie Horton... and Dukakis in a tank. Fear v. foolish. Fear wins! If only feeble dems would take a course from you, Kristoffer.
Dems have such an easy fear story to tell that is actually factual: Republicans are harming your children as they protect pedophiles and child sex traffickers. The scary, but factual stories are endles. This weekend, the orange bloat fired thousands of special ed employees of the Dept of Education. trump and republicans are increasing the cost of health insurance to the point where children will not be able to go to the doctor and possibly die. SNAP is being slashed so children go hungry. The vaccine boogeyman now puts children at greater risk of death from once nearly eradicated diseases.
Why aren't dems making commercials on how republicans are protecting pedophiles and child sex traffickers? Why not sometihng like Day 150 of trump and republicans protecting Jeffrey Epstein child sex criminals. Day 151, Day 152... And not to mention the millions of children trump, musk, doge, and GOP are starveing to death by ending USAID to they can give billios to the insatiable money appetites of the mega wealthy.
Dems could pound the military pay card. They could say trump is putitng our military in financial peril by not agreeing with our pay the military bill. Seems simple enough to hit the Sunday shows hard. Ignore all questions and just say repubs are harming our military. Gop style.
While dems are trying to play at least remedial offense, they seem to fail to take the attack to republicans in a manner that is strong, and determined. At least they have gotten off their butts a bit./. Dems have the people behind them but can't seem to hit a stride. Sad;y, dems are quite dim when they need to shine.
Paraphrasing Twain, "A republican lie can travel around the world and back again while dems and the truth are lacing up its boots."
Cheeto: Americans Second….Billionaires and Investors First
Scott Bessent was a fairly average hedge fund manager before he became Cheeto’s treasury secretary, was heavily involved with Argentinian companies and his friends would profit with good news Enter Cheeto’s corruption once again bailing out the Argentinian government to the tune of a $20B loan Of note is that Argentina has defaulted 9 times in the past on loans So Cheeto just gave $20B in taxpayer dollars in a shady loan deal
This is on top of Argentina selling soybeans to China because American soybeans farmers have lost that market because of Cheeto’s tariff policies Will American farmers decide that a vote for the Nazis in the 2026 midterms is a bad idea?
Americans second…..Cheeto has decided to not give government employees back pay after the government shutdown Cheeto and his Nazi allies in Congress don’t give a shit about Americans….only billionaires The Nazi arrogance is astounding
Wow. Another gem of an analysis and writing that informs, motivates, inspires. Thank you. There are volumes that I’d like to say, but for right now, I’d like to emphasize two things:
1) When you asked the child about her fears you never once told her she was “stupid” or “delusional” or tried to convince her there was “no such thing as monsters.” The Democrats and we “woke” persons continue to do that or certainly imply that. Tendency to do that is understood in face of the fantastical lies and manipulation that we are faced with. But as you point out so eloquently, it not only does not work, it intensifies the fears, and the person “doubles-down” in their belief.
It takes work and compassion and humility to “start where the person is at,”as delusional and hateful a place as that might be; not in agreement with their stance, but the ability and willingness to be with it and counter in any way possible. And it often can be possible. A shred of cognitive dissonance may grow. The experience of not being denigrated in turn may be an experience someone has never had.
2) The “Southern Strategy” was/is such a powerful tool as it is based in the core belief in the mythology of a caste/race/class system that will fight to the death to preserve itself. That is what we are witnessing yet again as the “order” based in that mythology will go as far as destroying the Republic, fellow citizens, anything it takes to keep this “order” in power. This is what must be challenged repeatedly and continuously, particularly by those of us who have “benefitted” by its tenets.
The “Southern Strategy” was deemed so powerfully effective that early on in the Nazi take over of Germany, a group was brought there from the American South to act as advisors to the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews in a way that would be accepted by the German people. Think about that. How to engineer the “normalization” of horror. How to ensure that the “unthinkable” can become not only “thinkable”, but celebrated.
The Americans were considered the experts.
Dr. Ealy, I've now read your essay three times. You're talking about two separate failed Democratic approaches. One: ignore Republicans' monster because consultants say no one cares about it. Two: present data showing that the monster isn't real.
I don't see you offering an approach that would work. The obvious answer, as you write in the essay, is not to adopt the same monster and outdo the Republicans in painting its monstrosity. That's still not a prescription, let alone one for success.
But what about using fear anyway? Real fear of a real monster, not a made-up one. Millions and millions of Americans must have voted for Biden and then for Harris at least in part out of fear of Trump and what he would do. Even in the wake of Jan. 6th, pooh-poohing those fears was a lot easier a year ago than it is now.
How many of us are frightened? How many are heartbroken?
ETA, tip for parents/sitters: Small children will believe that you can cast a monster-banishing magic spell. Repeat three times: "Monsters, go home!" Pause. Repeat three times: "There are no monsters here." Pause. "Shazam. Abracadabra. Amen." It worked for my four-year-old, and I didn't even have a magic wand.
Beautiful story about fighting Rose's monsters. Imagined monsters hiding under the bed or behind closed doors are scary. I remember it well. Pointing out how the Southern Strategy has always been good in creating some monster lurking to destroy such things as women's sports or taking your job. Fighting these unreal monsters is hard, because you are correct, people like to believe in them--not realizing someone is just scaring you with something not real. Well, I must admit I tried to whack the trans monster out of conversation in the last election. One father I met while door knocking was just so sure that trans athletes were taking over women's sports. I tried to remain rational, but finally had to walk away before I yelled something like "What would you have done back when we were fighting for title IX...?" Yep! I had to walk away. Also, I wondered how I would have answered the question you put before your class when I was age 18. Or even now. I probably would have set there wondering, not critical thinking, what the right answer should be. Critical thinking takes work and understanding. Given lots to think about how fight the monsters that the Republicans and this regime are inventing. So good to read your thoughts and insights. Hope all is going well with your classes. Thanks, professor. Take care.
I believe the article is right on, but am unsure of specifically how Democrats "battle the monster." I used to watch MSNBC and read progressive newsletters. All you had to do was listen to Joe Scarborough's rants and that seemed to be confronting and battling the monster. The same is true for Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell. They were every specific and very strong. They appeared to me to be battling the monster as were Democratic politicians.
Harris certainly appeared to me be making a case that the Republicans were lying and directly confronted "the monster". She wiped the floor with Trump during the debate but it did not seem to make a difference.
Corey Booker did more than just talk, he filibustered and stood his ground on the Senate floor for hours. But it did not seem to make a difference.
Our country is divided because people get their news from sources that support their political positions.
I do think that what will destroy the Republicans in the end is that they overreach and that Americans will finally decide they have had enough. Trump's poll numbers are sinking to unheard of levels on even his prize issues, such as immigration. Job numbers are bad and inflation is as bad or worse than it has ever been. So I am cautiously optimistic that the Democrats will take back the House (gerrymandering aside) and win back the Presidency (that is, if Trump does not figure out a way to run again in 2028). If Trump is not able to or chooses on not to run in 2028, there is no one in the Republican Party that has his charisma and will retain the kind of loyalty that Trump has enjoyed.
Biden won because people had had enough of Trump. Harris lost because Americans, despite one of the best economies in the world, still believed that their lives were not getting any better under Biden and they were not familiar enough with Harris because, apparently, they believed that she had not been properly vetted and that there were other possible candidates that should have been given a chance.
I wholeheartedly supported Harris and really thought she would win.
The one big thing that the article does not address is the fact that the media companies that control the flow of information to average Americans is controlled by the Right. Sinclair and other big media companies control the flow of information. They reach many more people because they own the lion share of radio and TV stations across the US.
Those are really fair points, Richard — and I completely agree that battling a lie is so much harder than battling the truth. If you think back to the Biden–Trump debate, every other word out of Trump’s mouth was a lie, but because he lied with confidence, it came off as strength. Even many Democrats framed him as the “stronger” debater, which shows just how easily performance can overpower honesty in modern politics.
You’re right that people like Maddow, O’Donnell, and Booker have done their share of confronting the “monster,” but the challenge isn’t just confronting it — it’s sustaining the message once the monster changes shape. Trump, Fox, and the broader right-wing media ecosystem are masters of morphing the narrative before Democrats can even land the punch.
Battling monsters or boogeymen is only difficult when you refuse to deal with them head-on. Democrats often want to fact-check or reason their way through a fight that requires emotional clarity. Republicans create fear; Democrats cite data. One of those sells faster than the other.
The way Democrats should deal with these monsters is to stop assuming voters already know the monster is fake. They need to name the lie, mock the absurdity of it, and explain what it’s distracting from — all in the same sentence. In other words: fight fear with story, not spreadsheets.
And you’re absolutely right about the media imbalance. Sinclair and other right-wing conglomerates have made sure that disinformation has the loudest microphone in the room. MSNBC might reach a few million cable viewers; right-wing talk radio and local affiliates reach tens of millions daily.
So yes — Democrats do “battle” the monster, but too often it’s like shadowboxing while the monster hosts a nationwide tour. Until they learn to fight on the same emotional terrain without sacrificing truth, they’ll keep losing to fiction that feels realer than reality.
Apparently, Senator Schumer, doesn’t know what, to, Democrats are, in a, quagmire, of , not knowing what, to, do! Senator Schumer is , an, enablers who knows nothing about politics!
Thanks, Linda — I hear your frustration. A lot of what looks like “not knowing what to do” from leadership is really a habit of reacting slowly and prioritizing optics over offense. That’s how Democrats end up in the quagmire you’re talking about: chasing “bipartisan” cover, which too often enables GOP brinkmanship instead of calling it out and ending it.
On Schumer specifically: the instinct to manage the news cycle instead of frame it is a real problem. When you’re forever negotiating with people who are negotiating in bad faith, you’re not leading — you’re laundering their chaos.
And about the famous Schumer family — the Baileys. If he’d rolled out that story once, I could respect the bit. But at this point the constant shout-out to the Baileys is so unoriginal it’s become self-parody. It’s giving “imaginary focus group.” Voters need clarity and contrast, not bedtime stories we’ve all heard ten times.
Bottom line: stop enabling, set terms, and repeat the truth with the same discipline the other side repeats the lie. Appreciate you for saying it plain.
As always, this column hits it out of the ballpark! Thank you.
Thanks so much, Cristi — really appreciate that! I’m glad the piece landed with you. I tried to balance the critique with something constructive, and your comment makes me feel like that came through. Thanks for reading and for the kind words!
Those of us in marketing, advertising and sales have understood this for decades. Unfortunately, Democrats struggle mightily with the concepts you present Kristoffer.
Tell me about it, MGL — I come from a communications and advertising background myself, and I’ve been beating this drum for years. You’re absolutely right: people in marketing and sales have understood for decades that repetition, emotional framing, and message discipline are everything. Democrats, unfortunately, still treat persuasion like a debate club exercise instead of a storytelling contest.
The GOP’s messaging machine borrows directly from commercial advertising — short, emotional, identity-driven, and easy to remember. Meanwhile, Democrats often rely on policy PDFs and bullet points. It’s not that the policies aren’t strong; it’s that the delivery doesn’t stick.
That’s why I keep emphasizing that Democrats have to brand their truth, not just state it. The psychology of influence hasn’t changed — emotion sells, clarity persuades, and consistency builds trust. Until Democrats fully internalize that, they’ll keep showing up to a marketing war with a fact sheet.
All very true. Dems are so “pure” they don’t understand politics is a business, that needs to sell to the citizenry. Quoting relentless constitutional law does not resonate with busy lives.
This is an amazing column! It should be sent to EVERY Democrat in Congress, all governors - across the board. Thank you, Professor Ealy, for spelling it out so clearly. The story of Rose and the monsters is something that every human who has ever tried to get a child to go to sleep (even if you don’t have your own children - as I do not) can immediately grasp.
Thank you so much, that really means a lot. I’m glad the story about Rose resonated with you — I wanted something that captured how fear works in politics in the same way it works in childhood: it’s irrational, emotional, and contagious if left unchecked. The “monsters under the bed” metaphor came from that idea — that leaders too often lecture instead of reassure, and that fear, when repeated enough, starts to feel like truth.
You’re absolutely right that this isn’t just a political lesson; it’s something deeply human. Anyone who’s ever comforted a child, or even battled their own anxieties, understands that naming the monster is the first step to disarming it. That’s why I wanted to strip the concept of political jargon and frame it through something we all instinctively understand — storytelling, emotion, and trust.
Thank you again for taking the time to read it and for your kind words. Comments like yours remind me why I keep writing these pieces — to bridge that gap between political logic and human experience.
Excellent! And despite our knowing better, many of us need to do the same. Instead of ignoring that silly monster, fight it and beat the heck out of it - every day if we have to. Social media is a perfect example. Instead of ignoring the screaming monsters, shut them down and just slay the monster and be willing to take the heat. We have to stop ignoring the monster! Thank you Kristoffer Ealy!
Thanks, Michelle — totally with you. Ignoring the “monster” just lets it grow. The fix is daily reps and clear tactics, especially on social media. A few I use/teach:
1. Name it fast. Say the lie plainly once, then label it (“This is a scare tactic about X”).
2. Translate to stakes. “If this sticks, here’s who gets hurt and how.”
3. Pivot to solution. One sentence with the credible alternative and a link/receipt.
4. Don’t feed the algorithm. Screenshot bad posts instead of boosting them with quote-tweets; add context above the image.
5. Use humor, not cruelty. A crisp analogy or meme travels farther than a paragraph of rage.
6. Message discipline. Same 10–12 words every time; repetition beats precision online.
7. Localize it. Tie the myth to a local school board, clinic, or workplace so it feels real.
8. Team sport. Coordinate replies with friends so the first screen under the lie is facts, not boos.
9. Take the heat, then log off. Set time limits; don’t let trolls rent space in your head.
You’re exactly right: stop ignoring, confront clearly, and accept the heat that comes with telling the truth. Appreciate you for saying it out loud!
Mr. Ealy! Good article! Thank you!
Thank you so much, Linda — I really appreciate that. I’m glad you enjoyed it and took the time to read it. Means a lot!
The GOP will continue to run a Willie Horton campaign until an opponent calls them out and delivers a "there you go again" moment.
You’re right, Joe — history keeps proving that this tactic works for them. The difference now is that Lee Atwater at least understood it as a strategy. As much as I’m not a fan of Atwater, I’ll give him his due — he knew how to weaponize coded language to motivate a base without alienating swing voters.
The modern GOP, though, seems to have forgotten the “strategy” part of the Southern Strategy. The dog whistles have become bullhorns, and while that still fires up the hardcore base, it’s starting to alienate everyone else. The overt race-baiting and grievance politics might win primaries, but it’s costing them long-term credibility in general elections.
Look at 2024 — Democrats didn’t lose in landslides. We lost close races we should’ve won. The House majority flipped largely because of aggressive gerrymandering in states like Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana after the Supreme Court gutted key provisions of the Voting Rights Act. In raw vote totals, Democrats actually won more House votes nationwide, but district maps diluted those votes.
So yes, the GOP keeps running the same Willie Horton-style playbook, but it’s losing some of its potency. The demographics and media landscape have shifted — and as those tactics become louder and less coded, the backlash is growing louder too.
I think BF is right. The Senate can institute the “nuclear option” to pass the CR and end the shutdown. But Mike Johnson recommends against it and there are a few GOP senators who are also against it. Here is something I found about it in Politico:
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/10/09/congress/shutdown-filibuster-nuclear-option-00599767
Time for me to contact my state’s Congressional Democrats…
That’s a good find, Summer — and I think you’re right that Johnson’s resistance says a lot about how performative this whole “shutdown brinkmanship” really is. Democrats often end up conceding arguments to the right, not because they agree, but because they’re so afraid of looking partisan that they hand over the emotional high ground.
I don’t think BF is necessarily wrong either — the GOP can act unilaterally in certain cases — but that’s part of the problem: they often choose not to, just to keep the public confused about who’s actually responsible. Republicans love to posture as if they’re being “forced” into gridlock by Democratic obstruction, when in reality they’re manufacturing the chaos to look like reluctant victims of their own mess.
Democrats could handle this better by framing it for what it is — not a debate over fiscal policy, but over accountability. The GOP creates these crises, then demands a participation trophy for eventually ending them. If Democrats called that play out every time instead of trying to look “bipartisan,” the narrative would flip quickly.
So yeah, you’re right — the nuclear option is there, the votes are there, and the obstruction is entirely by choice. It’s political theater, and Democrats keep letting Republicans write the script.
Keep teaching. You are really good at it!
Thanks so much, Gordon — really appreciate the encouragement. I’ll keep at it and try to make this work as clear and useful as possible. Grateful you’re reading and sharing!