Not all arguments are created equal. It’s why you’ve got to be selective.
To me, the greatest sales study on how humans really, truly think was when HSN (formerly the Home Shopping Network) began tracking its DPM, or “dollars per minute.” Every minute you’re on the air on HSN, the amount of money you’re generating is quantified in real time. Which means, 24 hours a day — for decades at a time — the home shopping channels have meticulously tracked which pitches sell products… and which ones, alas, do the exact opposite.
It’s possible, you see, for an argument to be so God-awful bad, it actually hurts you.
One of the things they’ve learned is that you’ve got to proactively address the stupidest, silliest, goofiest parts of your argument. Otherwise, your audience will fixate its “cognitive dissonance” on your idiocy, killing your DPM.
This is why infomercials say things like, “I know what you’re thinking: ‘How could we sell this unbelievable fishing pole-slash-Cuisinart for the low-low price of $19.99?’ Well, because of a shipping mistake…” Or the classic: “We’re selling this for the ridiculously low price of $19.99 because we know you’ll be a customer for life!”
Those lines aren’t accidental: They’re designed to stop you from fixating on a price-point that doesn’t make a lick of sense for a (supposedly) high-end product. It’s the salesman’s attempt to bulldoze through your intellectual objections, so you’ll focus on the more enticing parts of his argument.
And this brings us to today’s Democratic Party. Democrats are, quite possibly, the worst salesmen on the planet. Of all the issues bedeviling our nation — foreign, domestic, or something in the middle — they keep making arguments with plot-holes so huge that Gov. JB Pritzker (D-Ill.) could wear ‘em as a belt.
It’s given their audience “cognitive dissonance.”
So far, their only course-correction is a ham-fisted attempt to excise “deeply alienating” words and phrases (“birthing person,” “Latinx,” “othering”) from leftwing lexicons. But that’s misdiagnosing the problem: They’re not losing the audience over cosmetics!
It’s deeper than that.
But, hey, if they wanna waste their time giving a terminally ill patient a beauty makeover — instead of treating the actual ailment — that’s their business. (From caveat emptor to caveat patiens? Either way, that patient needs a second opinion ASAP!) But for everyone else, here’s a quick example of two of the biggest plot-holes in one of the biggest liberal arguments du jour:
Gerrymandering: If gerrymandering (redistricting) is so bad, then why do Democrats insist on doing it in Democratic states — and furthermore, what difference does it make if it’s done at the beginning of the decade versus the middle?
This ran yesterday in Politico:
The Center for American Progress, one of the most prominent liberal think tanks in Washington, urged states that have adopted independent redistricting commissions — which are predominantly blue-leaning states — to set them aside.
“The precise problem of commissions operating in so few states — and, within that, disproportionately in states governed by one party — is that that the system is susceptible precisely to this moment: political gerrymandering initiated by one party in the middle of the decade aimed at shifting the balance of power and circumventing the will of the people,” the CAP memo read. [emphasis added]
Question: Why is it perfectly okay to “circumvent the will of the people” at the beginning of the decade — but a horrible, evil, terrible thing to do so at the halfway point?
Do votes count less in the middle of the decade?
Liberals haven’t figured out a way to address these all-too-obvious contradictions, which slashed their tires, muddied their engine, and killed the momentum of their counterargument.
Nor have they addressed their own bloodlust for gerrymandering:
- Trump received 1.25 million votes in Massachusetts, winning 36% of the vote. The state has zero Republicans in the House.
- Trump received 737,000 votes in Connecticut, winning 42% of the vote. The state has zero Republicans in the House.
- Trump received 423,000 votes in New Mexico, winning 46% of the vote. The state has zero Republicans in the House.
- Trump received 2.49 million votes in Illinois, winning 43.5% of the vote. Out of their 17 congressmen, there are only 3 Republicans.
- Trump received 3.6 million votes in New York, winning 43.3% of the vote. Out of their 26 congressmen, there are only 7 Republicans.
- Trump received 6.1 million votes in California, winning 38.3% of the vote. Out of their 52 congressmen, there are only 9 Republicans.
Which makes their howling, screaming, and hysterics over Texas’ redistricting plans rather suspect: Right now, Texas — which hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in 50 years! — has 38 congressional seats, with 25 Republicans and 13 Democrats.
That’s a ratio far more forgiving than the RIDICULOUSLY gerrymandered districts in Blue States!
But this is the strategy that’s kept the Democrats afloat, in good times and bad. When Obama won the presidency in 2008, the Democrats won 52.9% of the votes in House elections… which somehow led to them controlling 59.1% of all the seats in the House of Representatives!
Fun fact: Kamala Harris won 42.4% of the vote in Texas, and 34% of Texas’ congressional seats are controlled by Democrats. Yet Donald Trump won 43.5% of the vote in Illinois — and just 17.6% of their congressional seats are controlled by Republicans!
So how can Pritzker claim that Trump is “cheating Americans out of their votes” with Texas’ redistricting when Illinois is exponentially MORE gerrymandered?
Short answer: He can’t.
Longer answer: It’s such an obvious contradiction, it’s distracted the audience.
Yet the Democrats continue to double down on it!
And that’s precisely the wrong PR strategy. Because their audience is stuck; they’re not moving forward until you address their “cognitive dissonance” and remove the roadblock.
To do otherwise is to misunderstand how audiences process information.
The Democrats’ best bet is to simply tell the truth: The Great Gerrymandering War of 2025 has NOTHING to do with democracy, dictators, or “cheating Americans out of their votes.” Instead, this is an all-hands-on-deck political war between the Left and the Right, with both sides exploiting the laws of the land to gain an upper hand.
Nothing more, nothing less.
And then, invite your audience to join the fight!
That’s a believable, credible PR pitch. (It also has the benefit of — GASP! — being honest.)
But the Democrats are refusing to act in their own self-interest. They’re hellbent on arguing about dictators, democracy, and the death of the republic.
And in the process, they’ve committed the single most common mistake in marketing: They’re marketing to themselves, not to their audience.
They’re focusing on what they wish was true, not what will actually move the needle. They’re too damn angry to think tactically or pragmatically.
It’s a hell of a way to run a political movement!
Either way, it won’t work: It won’t win hearts and minds; it won’t stop Trump; it won’t win the war of public opinion. All it’ll do is keep the hardcore leftists frothing with rage. And rage might generate social media clicks, but it doesn’t sell products.
Not even a fishing pole-slash-Cuisinart.
One Last Thing: The Democrats are on the ropes, but make no mistake: The donkeys are still dangerous. 2025 will either go down in history as the year we finally Made America Great Again — or the year it all slipped through our fingers. We need your help to succeed! As a VIP member, you’ll receive exclusive access to all our family of sites (PJ Media, Townhall, RedState, twitchy, Hot Air, Bearing Arms): More stories, more videos, more content, more fun, more conservatism, more EVERYTHING! And if you CLICK HERE and use the promo code FIGHT you’ll receive a Trumpian 60% discount!
Thank you for your consideration!
