(HOST) Following Tuesday’s primary results in Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Arkansas, the most common word used to describe voters was "angry." This morning commentator and veteran ABC News correspondent Barrie Dunsmore tells us why he thinks the real problem is something quite different.
(DUNSMORE) I do not dispute the fact that there is some voter anger out there. And, as might be expected, last Tuesday it was directed against incumbents and the establishment. But I have watched large Russian mobs tear down massive statues of Lenin with their bare hands, as the Soviet Union was disintegrating in the early 1990’s. I’ve seen thousands of British coal workers riot repeatedly against Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s decision to close down many of their mines in the 1980’s. And I was in Paris in May 1968 when French students, intellectuals and workers battled on the streets against the establishment represented by then President Charles de Gaulle. In each case there was seething, uncontrolled anger over fundamental political differences. People were killed and many more were injured as citizens fought with authorities over the future direction of their respective countries.
Which brings me to my own personal theory. I believe what we are seeing in American politics today is less anger than confusion.
I’m not trying to impugn the authenticity of Tea Party members. But it’s a fact that they are not starving; very few are unemployed; their children are not being drafted to fight in unpopular wars; and income taxes are historically low. They claim to hate the federal government but also warn that government not to touch their Medicare or their Social Security. Yet if enough Tea Party candidates such as Kentucky Republican senate nominee Rand Paul were suddenly elected and quickly passed the balanced budget amendment that he has promised – those are precisely the programs that would have to be seriously cut.
Likewise on the Democratic left there is anger at President Obama for giving up on a public option in the health care bill; for continuing the war in Afghanistan; and for not nominating a real liberal to the Supreme Court. But for all that unhappiness, do they really feel the country would be better off if Sara Palin and the Tea Party were running it?
I believe there is a reason for the confusion demonstrated by the inherent contradictions in the goals of both the far left and far right. It is because in the past decade or so we have gone from a fact based news media – to one based on opinions. I remember when someone might jokingly say, Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up. Today that’s not a joke – it’s a reality. People now watch the cable news network, listen to the talk radio station, read the publications and Internet blogs that only conform to their political prejudices. In response to this demand, most news organizations now supply the most controversial or outrageous opinions – within which facts simply do not matter. Gone are the days when false assertions were automatically challenged by knowledgeable reporters.
That is why most people today no longer trust the news media. But it’s also why far too many voters hold firm opinions that are mostly fact-free.