Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Whenever political consultant Mike Murphy joins the podcast, the sparks fly. This week is no exception as the man who coined the term "Bachmann-Schmachmann" takes no prisoners as he defends David Brooks, explains why Bachmann probably can't win, and gives a master class in how to parse campaign finance reports, all with his trademark style and humor. You may not agree with him, but you will not be bored.
P.S. We had some intermittent audio issues this week due to the bane of all podcasts: lousy hotel WiFi. We apologize in advance.
Get your hot links, get `em right here:
- No, we are not going to re-print the entire "man from Nantucket" limerick. That's why Google was invented.
- Here's a shot of John Kerry on his bike. Not exactly Dukakis on the tank, but close.
- Our man in Nantucket (not to be confused with the man from Nantucket) Rob Long snapped these photos of the Tea Party signs on July 4th.
- A $1.50 sounded awfully low for a cup of coffee in season in a tony resort town. So we called The Bean coffee shop on Nantucket and was told that a large latte goes for $4.25 a pop there. Bottom line: Ricochet is too cheap.
- The phrase "live at Budokan" is a reference to Cheap Trick's hit album released in 1979, featuring the single Surrender. Hear it the way James first experienced it by purchasing the cassette from Amazon, which you can pick up (used) for a penny.
- The much discussed column by David Brooks may be read here. Rob's post on Ricochet is here. Mollie Hemingway took umbrage with Mr. Brooks as well. Ricochet guest contributor Meghan Clyne kinda, sorta defended Brooks. Clearly, she didn't read the memo.
- Those bloop noises? That's Mike Murphy calling us on Skype. Mike, don't call us, we'll call you.
- Steve Allen was indeed the first host of The Tonight Show. Even though he died in 2000, he's got his own website, although it looks like it hasn't been updated since he passed away. Check out this video of Jerry Lee Lewis' TV debut on Allen's show. Incredible.
- Since Murphy is now writing for Time we thought it was fitting to link to this piece from 1981 reporting on budget battle Reagan undertook while he was recuperating from the assassination attempt on his life.
- Rob is correct: it is indeed being reported that Boehner and Obama are talking. And not just about lining up a putt.
- We're this close to having some Bachmann-Smachmann t-shirts printed up. The problem is, we'd probably have to share the dough with Murphy and Bachmann.
- Like it or not, in the age of Google, presidential candidates simply cannot make easily checked gaffes. It has nothing to do with the media. just ask Brit Hume. P.S. Editing your candidate's Wikipedia page to make her look like he or she was correct is creepy and Orwellian.
- Political strategist Ed Rollins is currently the guy charged with making sure Michelle Bachmann deosn't makes any more gaffes. Given some of his past clients, he should have a pretty good handle on how to do that.
- Mike did a great analysis on how to parse campaign financial reports. It's a must read.
- This year, The Ames Straw Poll is on August 13th at Iowa State University. Perhaps we should host a live chat that night with Murphy.
- The Washington Generals never win. Ever (OK, once in 1971). But they do have their own website and they appear to be hiring.
- The complete Murphy Time oeuvre is here. His piece on how Obama could overcome a weak economy through demographics is here. His post on Pawlenty's struggles is here and the "giggling" Pataki post may be read here. Finally, follow Mike's musings on Twitter. We do (nice shades, dude).
- Yes, it's true: Murphy will be doing a podcast for us on the election starting sometime in August. Really looking forward to that one.
- Give it up for Ricochet member Cas Balicki for his post Is It Time to Introduce a National Sales/Value-added Tax in the U.S.? He wins a copy of this week's Encounter Books Pick of The Week. Watch your email, Cas.
- No, Claire did not write a post about a legendary stripper, she wrote a post about buying roses from Gypsies.
- The "fast and furious" ATF arms for criminals story just keeps getting weirder and weirder. We'll see how high up it goes.
Music from this week's episode:
- Hallogallo by Nue!
- Michelle by The Beatles
The direct link to this week's episode (great for mobile devices!). But be like Mikey and subscribe. Don't use iTunes? Visit our Feedburner page for a number of other subscription options.
The Ricochet Podcast is proudly sponsored by Encounter Books. This week's featured title is Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent by Harvey Silverglate. Available in all formats at EncounterBooks.com.
- Comment (158)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Frozen Chosen: Look, Mike Murphy is who he is, he's not going to change his style for this website. If that offends people than so be it. It doesn't offend me and while I don't agree with his positions on many issues I do enjoy listening to his insight on the process of national elections and I don't want the naysayers to harsh my mellow by getting him kicked off of the site and the podcasts.
I think maybe those of you who are so offended by him worry that his prognostications carry a grain of truth which really threatens your reality.
In the immortal words of Sgt Hulka from the movie Stripes, "Lighten up, Francis" · Jul 8 at 2:12pm
I think that we owe a big round of applause to our newest, bestest buddy, and big toe... Mike Murphy.
Jan '11
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
ctruppi: The problem with Mr. Murphy is that you may not convert folks by screaming "Hayek" but the alternative is facing the abyss as Greece on steroids. I would rather the Republican party be the voice in the wilderness that people can turn to when molotov cocktails are flying in the streets of our cities and have a clean concsience that they tried to tell folks the reality of what would happen rather than be a partner in the doom just to appeal to a "changing demographic". We are on an unsustainable path and that is an irrefutable fact, and no rationalization to win elections can change that. 2012 must be a referendum on this simple fact because even if we end up losing this battle, history will prove to be on our side in the long run.
I don't want a compromiser to run and win in 2012 and maintain Obama-lite policies because I don't want any GOP involvement when the doo-doo hits the fan!!! · Jul 8 at 8:21am
Edited on Jul 08 at 08:23 am
Yes! A new name to begin following.
Sep '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
I don't want to tell tales out of school, but I was in Athens shortly before this delusional rating came out and all you had to do was spend some time talking to workaday Athenians to find out what a (literal) tinderbox it was.
May '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
I do agree with Murphy about the demographic reality. He also makes good points when talking about finances and the state-by-state election differences.
James was exactly right about tax reform at the end of the podcast. Government should not be taking our money and then determining how much to give back. Rebates serve politicians, not citizens.
A national sales tax is the way to go. If such a tax system would not pay for all the entitlements, programs, agencies and investments our government is currently mired in, well, that's a good thing. Nothing has so empowered proponents of big government as the national income tax (with all its loopholes) has done.
Murphy is wrong about the Tea Party's significance. I know people who voted for Obama and were fans of Glenn Beck a year later. The Tea Party movement (a political awakening) has not only exhilirated primary voters, as Mike suggests, but has also made casual voters more politically active and convinced some swing voters (Murphy's primary audience) to join Republicans by giving them principles to stand for.
Jun '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Aaron,
You are talkin' loco... and I like it!
Nov '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Aaron Miller:
Murphy is wrong about the Tea Party's significance. I know people who voted for Obama and were fans of Glenn Beck a year later. The Tea Party movement (a political awakening) has not only exhilirated primary voters, as Mike suggests, but has also made casual voters more politically active and convinced some swing voters (Murphy's primary audience) to join Republicans by giving them principles to stand for.
That is exactly what's wrong with Murphy's argument. He thinks he can somehow win elections by throwing all the popular parts of the party under the bus.
I am not a tea-partier (I've never been to a Tea Party, unless you count the ones with fine china my godmother used to give). Heck, I was a reluctant Reagan voter, because I was not anti-abortion in 1980. But I remember well what the Reagan voters are like; we need those people back, and they're the ones he seems determined to alienate.
May '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Mike says "...we're all about purism and who we purge out." The Republican party is not meant to be as single-minded as an advocacy group, but it is an alliance. To be effective, an alliance must have a unifying purpose. If Republicans are unable or unwilling to define themselves as anything more than "better than Democrats", then the party can dissolve with my blessing.
Definition requires identifying not only what a subject is, but also what it is not. It requires borders, limits.
Personally, I believe the core purpose of the Republican party is to seek limited, local government. That much unites the various factions within the alliance (or could, anyway).
My podcast notes finally come to an end with this last point...
How many of the most nonsensical and malicious ideologies of the past century have come out of the Ivy League universities and so-called "experts"? Nobody should be surprised by increasly cynical reactions to the advice of intellectuals, particularly during a time when government has become so dependent on these elites and simultaneously ruined our country.
May '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Lucy Pevensie
I am not a tea-partier (I've never been to a Tea Party, unless you count the ones with fine china my godmother used to give). Heck, I was a reluctant Reagan voter, because I was not anti-abortion in 1980. But I remember well what the Reagan voters are like; we need those people back, and they're the ones he seems determined to alienate.
I have never been to a Tea Party rally either. But I consider myself part of the Tea Party movement because Obama's election awakened me to what our government had already become and how far America has already fallen.
The way I see it, the Tea Party movement is essentially about seeing today's politics as not just the future of American government in the next four years or eight years, but as part of a political / ideological struggle which has spanned decades or even centuries.
Beltway bureaucrats see battles. Tea Partiers see the war.
May '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Here's a simple claim which I would like to hear Murphy, Peter and others argue for or against:
Ronald Reagan was popular with voters largely because he could tie every issue to first principles (that is, he made moral arguments).
Edited on July 9, 2011 at 12:04amJan '11
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Aaron Miller:
Definition requires identifying not only what a subject is, but also what it is not. It requires borders, limits.
Personally, I believe the core purpose of the Republican party is to seek limited, local government. That much unites the various factions within the alliance (or [sh]ould, anyway).
I like your comment but wanted to replace one word to describe how I feel on the matter. This should be the purity test. If the block of people who I ally myself with in a primary election cannot get behind this abbreviated policy stance [essentially a "screw having 'a policy'" stance] then I'm in the wrong alliance. I happen to believe we're very near the brink and therefore think that people like Murphy are in the bubble he accuses 'us' of being in. It'll be interesting to see which faction(s) of the GOP has/have the most leverage...or the most courage to vote their convictions.
Oct '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Mike Murphy:
Strikes me as strange how insecure so many of these comments are. Not all, but many. The point being to instantly condemn any voice that disagrees with the dogma. Refusal to accept any argument, regardless of factual merits. Then demonize the proponent of the argument as have sinister motives. Really want to live in a bland bubble where everyone agrees with you and the only facts that are to be believed are those that support your point of view...
Mr. Murphy, respectfully, this isn't normal ideological groupthink. On a deep level, David Brooks betrayed a lot of moderate Republicans who were trying to make a difference by reconciling their differences with conservative purists. There's a lot of moderates embedded in the tea parties and other conservative groups (like Rob Long).
You supported David Brooks, and that does hurt. We moderates cannot keep lying to the base forever; at some point we've got to explain ourselves to them. If that means a few lost elections and political volatility, so be it. At the very least, that'll root out corruption and address those things the base is right to complain about.
Oct '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
And come on, Mike! Did you seriously think we could keep lying to the base forever? If doing what the base wants ends in failure, fine; failure has a way of concentrating ones mind wonderfully. Coddling-while-ignoring the base is what gave us the unaccountable years of Bush.
It's not like Democrats are any better, far from it. Our coalition collapsed first, and I think we have a shot at rebuilding a long-term governing majority before the Democrats do. A coalition that's more accountable, a lot less corrupt, and responsive to what science tells us: i.e. it's impossible to make over-centralization work at the federal level (I'm not talking about Hayek, I'm talking about the basic limits of computation, limits you only surpass with parallel--i.e. not centralized--strategies).
Oct '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Aaron Miller
Lucy Pevensie
The way I see it, the Tea Party movement is essentially about seeing today's politics as not just the future of American government in the next four years or eight years, but as part of a political / ideological struggle which has spanned decades or even centuries.
Beltway bureaucrats see battles. Tea Partiers see the war. · Jul 8 at 2:59pm
That's what I heard at the one rally I attended. The leaders saw the Tea Party as a decentralized, leaderless, forty-year-long plan to get the country back on track. That particular group didn't even endorse candidates. It was all about a greater war, not short-term battles.
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Another kerfuffle! A few final thoughts.
First, Jeez, don't be so thin-skinned. I didn't call anybody a fascist; I criticized the idea of lockstep dogma.
Second, Caddell. Great consultant in the 70's. Now goes on Fox to tell wingers what they want to hear. That's not honest analysis. I call it as I see it. You should see the angry emails I get from the Left.
Third, the questioning of my motives and the name-calling is silly. I started at NCPAC in 1981. I've worked for conservatives in real, front-line trench elections for 28 years. Won most of 'em. But yes, Meg lost.
Finally, Bachmann. I have two objections. One, I think she would not only lose, but give the Congress back to Pelosi. Second, she not qualified to be the POTUS. She has made no mark in Congress or in MN. She's a management disaster in her office. She takes the Kuncinich line on foreign policy. Her debt and TARP positions are foolish. She wants to seize Rob Long's porn collection. And she can't find Concord on a map. There are better conservatives running who can win.
Aug '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Mike, I think this "idea of lockstep dogma" is largely a figment of your imagination, at least if you're trying to describe the people on this site.
Whatever Ricochet is, it's not lockstep dogma.
Sep '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
She wants to seize Rob Long's porn collection.
Oh, Mike. Take the weekend off. You're becoming unhinged. She'll bring in a better way to tax it.
Sep '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Second, Caddell. Great consultant in the 70's. Now goes on Fox to tell wingers what they want to hear. That's not honest analysis.
Then you should have no problem pounding him senseless on a podcast. Pay per view. I'm willing to pay. As the secret owner of Ricochet, surely there's money to be made.
Aug '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Frozen Chosen: Mike and Rob,
I sincerely hope the hostile response of my less pragmatic fellow Ricochetians does not derail the plans for the inside baseball podcast with Mr Murphy and friends. I would envision such a podcast as highly entertaining and informative.
Perhaps the ideological purists can develop their own podcast to discuss who is more conservative - Bachmann or Palin. Kind of like those old SNL skits about Bears fans discussing Mike Ditka, "A 3 foot tall Ditka vs Da Packers - who would win? Not even close - Ditka" · Jul 8 at 12:34pm
Call it The Echo Chamber
Jul '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
I sort of thought Ricochet was about hashing out ideas not playing the "people who criticize me/my tone are thin-skinned fascist/witch-hunter/cowards" card.
My main problem with Mike is his often arrogant, (imho), expression of his views, as if they are direct from Mt. Sinai and written on the requisite stone tablets.
I believe holding our collective conservative noses to vote for the Bush-Dole-McCain's of the party is what got us into this mess.
Bush's betrayal of "read my lips" destroyed the Reagan coalition and gave voters a good reason to doubt the honesty of the GOP to this very day.
How is supporting people who will manage our decline a bit more slowly, (as it seems Mike advocates), better than voting one's true beliefs and convincing others that those beliefs are right?
Most of us don't know you personally Mike, and you may be a great guy, but, (imho), you often come across as self-important, dogmatic and close-minded; pretty much what you accuse "purist" conservatives of being.
You might attract more "purists" with your ideas if you were a little less, well, you, when you deliver them.
Oct '10
Re: Ricochet Podcast #76: Bachmann-Schmachmann
Mike Murphy: Another kerfuffle! A few final thoughts.
First, Jeez, don't be so thin-skinned. I didn't call anybody a fascist; I criticized the idea of lockstep dogma.
You came awfully close. Republican-leaning Independents are only, what, 20% of the vote? Winning the White House will do no good if we cannot form a governing majority--and we can't form a true majority by lying to large numbers of voters.
We moderates need to reconcile with the other factions in our party. That's what derailed Obama; he got elected on a lie, tried to govern from the left, and lost his majority. Excluding the other factions in our party will not accomplish anything; centrist purism is just as bad as conservative purism.
Edited on July 9, 2011 at 3:01am