Democrats Hire “Word Count Reduction Consultants” To Avoid Losing All Voter Interest by Midterms
Bias: Center-Center
- Democrats talk too much: Democrats are incapable of not over-explaining answers, to what are seemingly very simple questions.
- Demsplaining spotlight: “Demsplaining,” see below.
Demsplaining (noun)
A unique Democrate phenomenon defined as a long, drawn-out, and overly complicated attempt to explain policies that the audience already hears, understands, and often disagrees with, but will be subjected to anyway in the form of additional words, theories, tangential historical references, and fabricated “relatable” examples. CLICK HERE FOR MORE.
Key Traits:
Often deployed when the speaker knows the policy is unpopular but believes adding more syllables will magically change minds.
Uses more words than necessary, usually increasing in complexity the more confused the audience looks.
Frequently involves irrelevant anecdotes and pseudo-academic theories nobody asked for.
Usage:
- “The senator’s five-minute yes-or-no answer turned into a 47-minute demsplaining session about economic equity, colonializm, and why her neighbor’s dog symbolizes climate change.”
Demsplaining
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a desperate attempt to stop bleeding voters somewhere around the third paragraph of every answer, Democrats have hired a new breed of elite “Word Count Reduction Consultants” to help them trim their messaging down by as much as 80%.
“For too long, when voters ask us a simple yes or no question, we’ve responded with ten minutes of college-educated-elite language, intersectional Venn diagrams, and a TED Talk,” said DNC communications director Linda Frazier, speaking at a press conference that inexplicably lasted 92 minutes, longer than every Trump monologue.
“Meanwhile, Republicans just say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and are done before we’ve even gotten through our first disclaimer about systemic oppression.”
The consultants, former Twitter character limit enforcers and Instagram caption editors, are reportedly teaching Democrats to “think in fewer words” when pressed on policies Americans dislike.
Examples of Messaging “Streamlining”
- Q: How many genders are there?
- Republicans: “Two.”
- Democrats (previously): “Well, gender is a social construct rooted in colonial frameworks and to truly understand this question, we must begin with the evolution of…” (audience already asleep)
- Democrats (now): “Lots.” (audience boos)
- Q:Should undocumented migrants be deported regardless of criminal record?
- Republicans: “Yes.”
- Democrats (previously): “It’s complicated, because when we look at root causes, socioeconomic disparities, and America’s historical role in destabilizing…” (CNN cuts to commercial)
- Democrats (now): “No.” (U.S. citizens push back)
- Q: Should taxes be raised to fund more government programs like USAID?
- Republicans: “No.”
- Democrats (previously): “We believe in a fair and equitable redistribution system where high-income earners contribute a proportionally…” (person who asked has already moved to Canada)
- Democrats (now): “Yes-ish.”
- Q: Is inflation a problem?
- Republicans: “Yes.”
- Democrats (previously): “Well, according to seasonally adjusted CPI metrics when measured over a twelve-month period…” (cashier just rang up $9 milk)
- Democrats (now): “Kinda.”
- Q: Should trans women (biological men) compete in women’s sports?
- Republicans: “No.”
- Democrats (previously): “It’s important to respect lived experiences, and sports categories were originally established by patriarchal frameworks…” (stadium boos in unison)
- Democrats (now): “It’s complicated… wait, damn it!” (consultants slam laptops shut)
“We’re Bleeding Words, Not Just Votes,” from an anonymous moderate Democrat.
Party officials believe that trimming explanations is the only way to compete with Republican messaging.
“We just can’t keep losing voters because our answers take longer than a Lord of the Rings director’s cut,” admitted one Democratic senator, who asked not to be named because their answer to “climate change?” lasted 11 minutes.
The consultants are optimistic, “We’ve already cut their average response length from 3,000 words to 600,” one said. “By 2026, we’re hoping Democrats can answer a single question without citing a New England Journal of Medicine study, a Toni Morrison quote, and a climate model projection for 2087.”
Republicans, meanwhile, are reportedly considering the opposite tactic, hiring “Complexity Consultants” to extend their answers beyond “Build the wall” and “Drill baby drill.” But for now, Democrats are focused on brevity.
“We’re learning,” said Rahm Emanuel, before pausing for 12 minutes to explain what he meant by “we.”
