Monday, June 1, 2015

Conservative Media in California: Influential or Inconsequential?

California is getting bluer and bluer.

The demographics are changing, and concerned conservative partisans believe that it is too late to turn the liberal tide flooding the state.

The infighting has not eased, even though Republicans unseated Democratic incumbents in the state legislature, and stopped the liberal-Democratic supermajority.

The New Media, from Breitbart to Daily Caller to Hot Air, with the Washington Times, are punching back at the easily-misleading headlines which have defamed the conservative and Republican agendas at the expense of the most illiberal liberal nullities.

There is so much blogging and writing, countermentum bringing balanced.

And yet. . .California is still blue, still Democratic, still adrift on liberal insanity.

Has the push for conservative talk radio, film, and press been influential, or is it all just inconsequential, and a vast waste of time, aside from those who profit from media individually?

John and Ken have been on the airwaves for over two decades in California.

Hot and ready conservatives blasting illegal immigration, but with an independent streak, John and Ken from the East Coast making their opinions plain on the West Coast, seem to be coasting on Easy Street.

They are popular, they are engaging.

Yet the state of California has gotten bluer and more Democratic, more liberal, and the working man is looking for work, opportunities, and ultimately prosperity elsewhere.

They are still popular, but are they really effective?

Is talk radio, is conservative commentary influential in California?

I had contacted Jon Fleishman of Flash Report some months ago, talking about getting the Drivers Licenses for Illegals law repealed by popular initiatives.

His comment was cynical, if not outright depressing:

We may just need to move. Public opinion isn't with us here. Our state is too blue.

So, the leader of a widely-read news site concludes that we conservatives will just have to go somewhere else?

Richard Rider: San Diego Taxfighters Association

He is not alone. Richard Rider, a libertarian-leaning blogger, posted similar dim hopes:

Sadly, the GOP is doomed in California. The party's minority standing is only going to get worse, thanks to the myopic "illegal alien" focus of too many in the Republican electorate.

The CA demographics will only worsen. Whites -- a split constituency -- are now only a plurality in CA -- and shortly will lose even that status to Latinos. And the GOP has done a bang-up job of alienating Latinos -- a constituency we should split with Democrats. 
 . . . .

Few are aware that our illegal immigrant population has been significantly DROPPING since 2007. Or that our public school population numbers have been largely stagnant since about the turn of the century. They see illegal immigration as a growing catastrophic problem.

 . . . .

Here's the bottom line: If you really want to live in a GOP state -- if that's a top priority for you -- you need to leave California. It ain't EVER gonna happen here. Not even close.

 I did not share Rider's views on some of these points. I do not believe that an open border or pathway to citizenship amnesty is the approach.

Another blogger, Aaron F. Park, share this comment with me on the immigration issue:

the Dems have made the issue damn near impossible to solve. They don't want it solved. They want to continue to inflame the hard right so they can play the race card. The good news is that it is solvable without Amnesty.

So, the conservative New Media drive is a big, washed-up failure, then?

Jon Fleischman

I had asked Jon Fleishman a few other questions:

You think that California is a lost cause at this point?Do you feel that Breitbart CA has been unable to shift the narrative?

 And he answered:

Uphill. And changing the culture is a much bigger job than one website can accomplish.  But we must press forward. 
"More than one website can accomplish" -- how many websites will it take? How much more blogging will it take to change California consensus on some of these issues?
Rider endorsed some key fiscal conservatives in San Diego, and he mentioned the electoral success of one of them in particular, Chris Cate. Because this Republican won a seat on the San Diego City Council, Republican mayor Kevin Faulconer  has veto power on the council, in that the liberal elements in the city cannot override his decisions on their own.
Rider did not just blog -- he worked with local campaigns and got someone elected.
Fleishman's point, and Rider's record, as well as off-hand discussions with other candidates make it very clear:
We are not going to change California blogging. . .by itself.
Yes, write. Yes, make your case for conservative values.
But we have to start writing down-to-earth news that gets people mad enough to do something about what they see taking over, and taking down, California.
Are we interested in getting rich? Are we interested in being influential? Are we at all interested in what is interesting other people in the state?
Or, are we just content to sit back and smirk: "Stupide Left Coast!" while everything sinks into the Pacific?
We can become like old cranks who sit on the porch, watching the world go by, get worse, and continue to complain. This setup best describes John and Ken, in my opinion. They get rich and famous mocking Jerry Brown and the Democrats in Sacramento. Has it done anything for the state? Have they helped stop illegal immigration? They are entertaining, but they have not been effective.
Or we can put our words together with actions, engage fellow conservatives and concerned citizens in general, regardless of party affiliation.
Do we want to influence opinion, or just feel influential? Is conservative media in California influential, or just inconsequential?

No comments:

Post a Comment