The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, one of the nation’s great political reporters, was a little off his game today. His story about the difference between Bush’s and Kerry’s audiences downplayed the single biggest factor explaining the discrepancy.
The Republican faithful love their candidate; the Democratic faithful have less such enthusiasm for Kerry but know he is their vessel for defeating Bush — about which they are passionate.
The difference explains why crowds at Bush rallies, though similar in size to those at Kerry events, have been more energetic. The reception for Kerry is warm at Democratic events; the reception for Bush at GOP events is akin to that of a rock star.
To highlight his point, Milbank quotes a guy at a Bush rally in Ohio who says he’s “100 percent for Bush” and a retired trucker at a Kerry rally who’s “50-50,” but believes the nation needs a “serious change.” Milbank wants us to know that Bush’s audiences are blindly loyal and are completely convinced in the president’s infallibility, while Kerry’s audiences aren’t nearly as excited about their guy.
But there’s a simple explanation for all of this, which I’ve been harping on for months, and which Milbank downplays: Bush’s audiences are pre-screened to guarantee only sycophants get in. Kerry could be greeted with the same kind of enthusiasm Bush receives, but he’d have to follow Bush’s tactics (loyalty oaths, forced volunteering, etc.), which Kerry wisely refuses to do.
There’s no great mystery here. The trucker who is “50-50” wouldn’t be allowed entry to a Bush rally. When the president walks on the stage, he’s greeted as a “rock star” because organizers have gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure that only adoring fans are in the audience.
Milbank gives readers the impression that Bush’s support is rock-solid while Kerry’s is tepid, but he neglects the explanation that disproves the theory. We’re not looking at “divided passions”; we’re looking at a stacked deck.