CONTROLLING

THE

NARRATIVE,

PART II

Another www.RobertDyer.net Exclusive!!!

Part I discussed one of the unprecedented ways county elected officials coordinated their campaign efforts with local media.

With this strengthened cooperation, they then provided the local media with a set of talking points. Local papers, radio, TV and associated websites never diverted from this message through Election Day on November 2.

During the spring, the county's financial crisis - and pending revocation of its long-standing AAA bond rating by Wall Street rating agencies - had the media, political and business establishment worried. For the first time, cracks were beginning to appear in the united Democratic front. "Conventional wisdom" began to suggest that at least two At-Large councilmembers would be defeated in the September primary. Hans Riemer and Becky Wagner were preordained by the establishment as the replacements they were most comfortable with.

Even allies such as the Washington Post and Gazette began to mildly criticize the incumbents. The Post went so far as to publish a fairly devastating editorial about their failures. At the time, however, I warned readers of this blog that the editorial left a major escape hatch, that would allow the Post to re-embrace the failed incumbents.

Becky Wagner had by this point indicated that she would not necessarily be a rubber stamp for unions on the council. A minor email dustup between one union and Wagner was detailed on a local Democratic blog. It's obvious that at this point, the establishment determined that they wanted at least 3 of 4 incumbents to return, if not all four. These incumbents may not have been able to manage the finances, but they could raise taxes, and - most importantly - they had the agenda the establishment (developers, media, Democratic business leaders, etc.) wanted. Anyone who had given any indication that they would take a serious approach to the structural deficit - as opposed to the cut services/raise taxes/preserve money for developers, unions, special interests approach - was now out of the running.

But how to convince the public that the inept council should be given another chance?

Create a new narrative.

The new talking points made clear the old council would be back, like it or not.

The talking points were:

1. The fiscal crisis is the result of "good intentions." These councilmembers are good people at heart. They care about the most vulnerable and social justice. They believed the good times would last forever, and spent generously in response to demands from the community for services and just wages. - - This idea was first floated in an odd Washington Post article.

2. The council made big mistakes - but with good intentions! - and has learned from them. This won't ever happen again.

3. Every jurisdiction is facing the same challenges, and this county has fared better than most. (Not true. Montgomery had the largest budget shortfall of any jurisdiction in the region, equal to the state of Maryland's shortfall).

4. This disaster was caused by Wall Street, the housing market and George W. Bush. (Council incumbents bizarrely referred to George Bush frequently during debates).

5. Marc Elrich is no longer a radical from Takoma Park, but a "Man for All Seasons," whom Republicans and Democrats alike should vote for. He has business and developer support, yet still has the support of all of his old liberal allies. Steve Hendrix wrote the infamous puff piece in the Post that drove this message home.

6. Hans Riemer hasn't told us anything specific about what he'll do in office, and if that's good enough for us, it's good enough for you. He's a smart guy, he'll do the right things, even if we don't know what those things are yet. Trust us.

7. Bus Rapid Transit will magically get the 85% of people who refuse to ride a bus to ride a bus. (oh, yeah, it also will be used by developers to flip suburban neighborhoods into urban town centers - no big deal, right?)

8. The incumbents have taken action, formed weak blue ribbon panels that will report back after the election, passed an optional "fiscal and reserves policy" with numbers that don't even add up, and happy days are just around the corner. They've cut a whopping, astronomical 4% out of a 4 billion dollar budget. Wow, that's amazing.

This narrative was pushed by every media outlet in the area.

It's very simple: if this narrative doesn't change, no Republicans can win.

It didn't change. Republicans lost.

Sure enough, the Post used the escape hatch and endorsed 3 out of the 4 incumbents, despite having editorialized on their incompetence mere weeks earlier. The Gazette, unions and business groups followed suit - incredibly, endorsing politicians who had only hurt their members.

Voters didn't know the extent of our fiscal crisis, and many did not bother to research the issues or the candidates before voting.

How many county council at-large debates were covered by the Post. Gazette. Sentinel, Examiner, and TBD? ZERO.

How many articles about me were run in those same media outlets? ZERO.

It was a total blackout. If a Republican candidate wins a debate in the middle of a forest - will anyone know? Of course not.

Democratic candidates were able to save much money on signs, advertising and mailers, with the media doing all the heavy lifting for them.

It's outrageous.