Mediaboss Marketing

Do you know who Chandler Bolt is?

If youre an online marketing nerd like me, you probably do.

But, if youre part of the other 99.9% of the world who isnt super excited about this Internet marketing stuff, youve probably never heard of this man.

So, what is he doing with this headline on Business Insider?

How did he get on there?

Is he rich or something? Yes, he is indeed.

Thats part of the beauty of online marketing.

This 21-year-old kid has made hundreds of thousands of dollars from his kitchen table.

No need for fame, magazine interviews, talk show visits, or acting classes (you know, to act in a blockbuster movie).

You have no clue who Chandler Bolt is. But he has made tons of money, and hes also helping others do the same.

His company, Self-Publishing School, helps people publish books on Amazon and make a living from it.

If youre an introvert, thats a cause to celebrate!

Fewer than 20 years ago, extroverts had a way better chance of becoming rich and successful.

Why?It involved a ton of networking.

You had to hire employees and build a huge company. Or, for a career in arts, music, movies, etc., you had to get every person in your industry to know you.

While connections are still a huge deal, today you can get them right from your couch (or from your living room floor in my case).

As a single individual, you can build a huge business from the comfort of your home after work, during your afternoons, and on your weekends.

I dont think that Im being overly dramatic when I say that online marketing is your shot at the life of your dreams.

Trust me I would know.

I want you to have as much fun at work as these guys and I do. So, today Ill introduce you to this world with my online marketing guide.

Note: Even if youre deep down the rabbit hole already, you can still learn a ton of new things from the following examples.

If youre interested in a particular topic, feel free to jump ahead:

If youve read my previous guide on digital marketing, you already know that its different.

Not every digital marketing campaign is automatically an online marketing effort.

According to TNMedia, online marketing is any tool, strategy or method of getting the company name out to the public. The advertisements can take many different forms and some strategies focus on subtle messages rather than clear-cut advertisements.

Want the drop-dead simple version of it?

Online marketing is any effort to spread the word about your company that uses the Internet to reach people.

Basically, its anything that you do online to get more eyeballs on you, grab peoples attention, and hopefully, at some point, get them to buy from you.

There are seven major sub-categories of online marketing that I want to cover in this guide.

Weve already talked about search engine optimization (SEO),and I showed you all of the important aspects of it that you have to get right.

Next to SEO, theres search engine marketing (SEM), which is simply the paid version of SEO.

Marketers pay Google to display ads in their search results in the hopes that they will drive traffic (especially interested people, or leads) to their product landing pages.

Then theres content marketing. This iswhere marketers try to create valuable media and content to distribute to potential future customers. This is the good guy version of online marketing where you mostly try to guilt people into buying.

Of course, you already know social media marketing, which is where you use one or several social media channels to engage with customers, build relationships, and then send them to your products and services.

Pay per click advertising (or PPC)is similar to search engine marketing, but it isnt limited to Google and its competitors. Most social media networks let you create ads that integrate naturally into their feeds, allowing you to pay for clicks to your website.

Affiliate marketingis a kind of referral marketing where you share profits with fellow marketers in exchange for promoting each others products.

And finally, theres email marketing, which some already consider old-school. But its still one of the most effective channels. Once your customers have given you permission to contact them, you can email them at any time, providing value and asking them to buy when the time is right.

You can already guess how big online marketing really is. You know how huge of a space each of these individual categories fill.

I mean, just think about how many social media platforms you can name off the top of your head:

Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Tumblr, Google+, YouTube, Periscope, LinkedIn, Reddit, StumbleUpon

OK, you get the point.

I want to give you a good grip on all of these categories just like in our beginners guide, yet not drown you in the vast information thats out there.

Thats why Ill give you one example in each category of someone who absolutely crushes itin their niche along with some great points to help you get started.

Ready. Set. Go!

It goes without saying that I think Quick Sprout is one of the best sites when it comes to SEO(were kind of a big deal, I think).

Our Advanced Guide to SEOalone has gotten thousands of shares.

But, instead of spending an entire category bragging, I want to point you to someone who is a true search engine marketing ninja who has worked for us at Quick Sprout for quite some time.

I want to point him out not only because he has all of the SEO skills you need up his sleeve, but also because he is super underrated.

Every time I read an article like15 SEO Gurus That You Should Know for 2015,Im shocked that hes not on there.

Brian Dean, aka Backlinko, might be flying under the radar. But when you start Googling around and learning SEO, youre bound to bump into him.

He outranks huge sites like Wikipedia, Forbes, and Copyblogger, and he completely dominates the SEO space with his super long case studies that provide actionable, step-by-step instructions for upping your SEO game.

Backlinko ranks #1 AND #2 for how to get backlinks.

Whats great about his blog is that instead of just rounding up SEO news like Search Engine Land and others do, he actually shows you how to implement good SEO techniques that work.

As I outlined in one of the previous guides in this series, SEO isthe process of optimizing your online content so that a search engine likes to show it as a top result for searches of a certain keyword.

Brian is one of the best sources on the web for you to learn how to do search engine marketing right.

For example, Brian recently published an article called How to get backlinks with guestographics.

There, he does two things.

1. He shows you the results that prove thatthe strategy works.

2. He gives you detailed steps that you can follow to executeit.

As a case study, he talks about someone who hes helped pull off this strategy in their niche.

You see the results, and then you can just scroll down and follow along as you read. In this case, the steps are:

Thats easy to follow, right? So, whats the catch?

Its hard to execute. It takes time.

And thats the reason that not many people do it. Be one of the few who does and youll get the results.

Just check out this backlinkthat we got to a Quick Sprout infographic:

Do you want more proof?

Go through the entire Backlinko blog. Youll find fewer than 40 posts over the last several years.

If Brians SEO didnt work, then he would never have been able to grow Backlinko to 100,000+ monthly readers, 100,000 email subscribers, and such a massive SEO brand with fewer than 40 blog posts.

The following three blog posts are the best ones to help you get started:

Within search engine optimization, there are two big sectors to be aware of:

On-page and off-page SEO. Lets dive into each.

Over the past few years, Google has made numerous updates to their algorithms.

Data tells us that Google makes up to 600 changesto their algorithm every single year.

Its almost impossible to keep up with Googles rapid pace and changing user behavior.

But one thing thats remained relatively constant is conducting on-page SEO.

Most on-page activities for SEO arent linked to direct ranking factors, but rather to indirect factors like click-through rate and time on site.

For example, an on-page SEO task thats common is to optimize your meta description and title tag:

Your title tag and meta description are what shows up on a given Google search result. For example, if someone searches for SEO Tips, my post will show up with the headline and description that Ive personally customized.

While placing keywords in the title and description can help users navigate the content faster (as seen by the bolded text), it doesnt directly increase rankings.

So simply stuffing keywords in your meta and title tags isnt an option.

But they do contribute to click-through rate. When your title tags and meta descriptions are more compelling or related to the topic that someone is searching for, you can expect higher click-through rates.

And the higher the CTR, the higher the chance of ranking better.

Google is all about providing the best user experience possible. So if Google notices that your post that ranks at #10 is getting a higher CTR than the post above you, they will move your content up.

On-page SEO consists of a few major elements to be aware of:

In this section, Ill walk you through how you can improve each of these elements to get your on-page SEO on the right track.

Crawl errors

Crawl errors can be anything from a 404 error (broken link) to duplicate content. And all of these issues can plague your website with:

If youve ever seen this on your site, its a broken link errorthat can cause major problems:

For example, 404 errors can impact your traffic heavily if another external source is linking to them.

If youve gotten your content featured on another site, but the link is broken, youre losing out on tons of traffic.

One of the fastest tools to fix crawl errors that could be harming your site is Screaming Frog.

Its a technical SEO tool that can scan your website for free, telling you detailed information on what you need to fix and how to do it:

Go here to see the original:
Online Marketing Made Simple: A Step-by-Step Guide

Webliquids offers an inclusiveSEO training in Chandigarh. The extensive practical training provided bySEO training institute in Chandigarhequips live projects and simulations. Such detailedSEO coursehas helped our students secure job in various MNCs. The trainers at Webliquids are subject specialist corporate professionals providing in-depth study in SEO course.

Further, we have kept the SEO Course duration flexible. From classroom to fast-track & one-to-one classroomSEO trainingis provided during weekdays and weekends to the attendees. Our modern lab is equipped with latest technologies helping students avail a successful SEO training and certification from the institute

In This Search Engine World all the businesses are competing to get 1st-page rank in search engines results pages and with our SEO Institute in Chandigarh, this is Possible to understand how this works. SEO is a Part of Internet Marketing. WebLiquids Provide Best SEO Training in Chandigarh, Mohali, Panchkula, Punjab, India with 100% Job Assistance.

SEO Training Course in Chandigarh

We understand and being one of the bestSEO Training Institute in Chandigarh we have always tried to give a result oriented SEO, SMO, SEM, SMM, ASO, ORM, Youtube Training to our Students. Our aim is to prepare our students for best SEO Training and Techniques which will help them in making their career as a Digital Marketer Expert or as anSEO Professional.

Chandigarh is a Great Place for Education, There are a lot of career options for Student as well as for Professionals. In Chandigarh, a lot of Companies are looking for SEO Expert, who can handle their Web sites. If you want to be a Digital Marketer and want a Better Career Then, Consider taking Our Demo Class of SEO. For the Head Start Check This Beginners Guide to Technical SEO.

Whether you are a Student, a Graduate, A Working Professional, a Businessman or an Entrepreneur our SEO Training center in Chandigarh will give you a better understanding of Seo.So you can make a Plan to develop strategies and then finally know how to execute Search Engine Optimization to get better results for yourself and for your clients, We will also make you understand, Why a Website is Useless without SEO and Why SEO is all About Having Good Content.

SEO has become a part of the growing online marketing ecosystem of Inbound Marketing". Search Engine Optimization and Digital Marketing is the most booming industry and it is at its initial stage in India. India would be one of the largest hubs of Digital Marketing and SEO in coming future. And this will generate employment in all the fields of different industries. Attending Classes of SEO from a recognized Academy would be highly beneficial for your business.

How is SEO important for your Businesses? As we know all the businesses will go Online and would have their Web sites to target online customers and consumers because this Online Marketing or the Digital Marketing is budget friendly and targeted as compared to the Old Traditional Marketing. So this would bring a large number of Job opportunities.

Being an SEO Professional you don't have to depend only on the job, you can also work as a freelanceras the job opportunities are massive. So if you are trained in SEO then you can work as SEO freelancer or you can work as an Individual SEO Consultant.

Our SEO Training Course Curriculum is completely designed as per the current Industry standards and as per Search Engines guidelines. Being one of the leading SEO Training Institute in Chandigarh and India, We always start our Training from the basic of SEO and therefore teach our Students the most advanced level of SEO. So by the end of Our SEO Training, you will be skilled enough to handle SEO Projects on your own.

More here:
Webliquids - Best Seo Training in chandigarh | Seo Course in ...

UPDATE: March 1, 2014

President Yanukovych's backtracking on a trade and cooperation agreement with the EU in November 2013 - in favor of closer economic ties with Russia - led to a three-month protest occupation of Kyiv's central square. The government's eventual use of force to break up the protest camp in February 2014 led to all out pitched battles, scores of deaths, international condemnation, and the president's abrupt ouster. An interim government under Acting President Oleksandr TURCHYNOV has called for new presidential elections on 25 May 2014, and now Russian troops are in the Crimean Peninsula. Stayed tuned...

EARLY HISTORY:

As varied peoples migrated from Asia into Europe, Ukraine was first settled by the Neolithic people, followed by the Iranians and Goths, and other nomadic peoples who arrived throughout the first millennium BC.

Around 600 B.C., the ancient Greeks founded a series of colonies along the shore of the Black Sea, and Slavic tribes occupied large areas of central and eastern Ukraine.

Near the end of the 10th century, Vladimir Sviatoslavich (Vladimir the Great) converted most of the population to Christianity, and at that same time, Kiev (Kyiv) was growing into an important part of Kievan Rus.

Kievan Rus was an influential medieval polity (or city state) and the largest in Eastern Europe from the late 9th to the mid-13th century. It eventually disintegrated under the pressure of the Mongol invasion of 12371240.

In factthe Mongol raiders (from China), all but destroyed Kiev in the 13th century. The Mongols were cruel and took few prisoners, so locals often fled to other countries and Ukrainian settlements soon appeared in Poland and Hungary.

Because Poland and Lithuania fought successful wars against the Mongols, most of the territory of what is now modern Ukraine was annexed by Poland and Lithuania in the 14th century. And following the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (or union) Armenians, Germans, Poles and Jews immigrated to the Ukraine.

After the formation of the Commonwealth, Ukraine became a part of the Kingdom of Poland. Colonization efforts by the Poles were aggressive, social tensions grew, and the era of the Cossacks (peasants in revolt) was about to surface.

The Ukrainian Cossack rebellion and war of independence began in 1648, and it sparked an era known in Polish history as The Deluge, an effort that surely undermined the foundations and stability of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

In the late 1700s Poland's three powerful neighbors, Austria, Prussia and Russia coveted Poland. None wanted war with each other so they just decided to divide the now-weakened Poland in a series of agreements called the Three Partitions of Poland, and much of modern-day Ukraine was integrated into the Russian Empire.

In the 19th century, the western region of Ukraine was under the control of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Russian Empire elsewhere, and the economy was totally dependent on its agricultural base.

Ukrainians were determined to restore their culture and native language. However, the Russian Government imposed strict limits on attempts to elevate Ukrainian culture, even banning the use and study of the Ukrainian language.

When World War I finally ended, many European powers (such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire) ceased to exist, and because the October Revolution broke apart Russia, the Ukrainians now saw an opportunity and they declared an independent statehood.

Unable to protect their militarily, the Ukraine landmass was soon fought over by many forces, including Russia's Red Army and the Polish Army. In the end (by treaty) Poland would control land in the far west, while the eastern two-thirds became part of the Soviet Union as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

In the 1920s, Ukrainian culture and pride began to flourish once again, but Joseph Stalin (the Soviet leader) was not pleased, and his government created an artificial famine; a deliberate act of genocide that by 1932 caused (an estimated) 3 to 7 million peasant deaths.

Continue reading here:
Ukraine Map / Geography of Ukraine / Map of Ukraine - Worldatlas.com

This article is part of a series on thepolitics and government ofEuropean Union

The European Union has a budget to pay for policies carried out at European level (such as agriculture, assistance to poorer regions, trans-European networks, research, some overseas development aid) and for its administration, including a parliament, executive branch, and judiciary that are distinct from those of the member states. These arms administer the application of treaties, laws and agreements between the member states and their expenditure on common policies throughout the Union. According to the European Commission, 6% of expenditure is on administration, compared with 94% on policies.[1]

To pay for this, the EU had an agreed budget of 143billion for the year 2014, representing around 1% of the EU-28's gross national income (GNI).[2] Prior to 2014, the EU had a budget of 864.3billion for the period 20072013, representing 1.05% of the EU-27's GNI for the period.[3]

The EU budget is proposed annually by the European Commission. The proposed annual budget is then reviewed and negotiated by the Council of the European Union (which represents member states' governments) and the European Parliament (which represents EU citizens). In order for the budget to be finalised, consensus of all member states is required.[4]

The annual budget must remain within ceilings determined in advance by the Multiannual Financial Framework, laid down for a seven-year period by the Council (requiring the unanimous approval of every Member State) with the assent of the Parliament.[5]

The budget for a year is determined in advance, but final calculations of payments required from each member state are not completed until after the budget year is over and information about revenue and expenditure is available, and correction mechanisms have been applied.[citation needed]

The European Court of Auditors is the fifth institution of the European Union (EU). It was established in 1975 in Luxembourg to audit the accounts of EU institutions.

Despite its name, the court has no judicial functions. It is, rather, a professional external investigatory audit agency. The primary role of the court is to externally check if the budget of the European Union has been implemented correctly, in that EU funds have been spent legally and with sound management. In doing so, the court checks the paperwork of all persons handling any income or expenditure of the union and carries out spot checks. The court is bound to report any problems in the court's reports for the attention of other states and institutions, these reports include its general annual report as well as specific and special reports on certain bodies and issues.[6] The court's decision is the basis for the European Commission decisions, for example: when the court found problems in the management of EU funds in the regions of England, the commission suspended funds to those regions and prepared to fine those who did not come back up to acceptable standards.[7]

In this role the court has to remain independent yet remain in touch with the other institutions, for example a key role is the presentation of the court's annual report to the European Parliament. It is based on this report that the parliament makes its decision on whether or not to sign off the European Commission's handling of the budget for that year. The court, if satisfied, also sends assurances to the council and parliament that the taxpayers money is being properly used and the court must be consulted before the adoption of any legislation with financial implications but the opinion is never binding.[8]

The European Court of Auditors has signed off the European Union accounts every year since 2007, but has highlighted that they are materially affected by error and, while making it clear that the European Commission has more work to do, has highlighted that most of these errors take place at national level and concern decentralised programmes like agriculture and regional funding rather than money managed centrally in Brussels.[9][10]

Following a report by the European Court of Auditors that found that 4.8% of the EU budget in 2012 was affected by error, senior German MEP Inge Grle (CDU), a member of the European Parliaments budgetary control committee, claimed that "numerous questions arise concerning the willingness of the court, to significantly correct downward, the level of error rate after discussions with the audited authority, the EU Commission half of the errors in the structural funds sector were excluded from the estimate of the damage of the court, otherwise the numbers would be even worse".[11]

On 29 June 2011 the European Commission presented the Communication "A Budget for Europe 2020" to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.[12]

Due to the tough economic times, seven member states (Austria, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) argued during the 26 March 2012 General Affairs Council meeting that the EC's proposed overall amount for the seven-year EU budget plan should be reduced by 100 billion, or in the case of Sweden, by more than 100 billion.[13]

On 8 February 2013, European Union leaders agreed to cut the budget by 3.3%; the agreement on the proposed budget by the European Council has yet to be approved by the European Parliament, adopted unanimously by the Council of the European Union and ratified by the national parliaments of all member states; if adopted, it will be the first cut in its 56-year history.[14][15][16]

The Budget was finally approved by the European Parliament Tuesday 19 November 2013 by an overwhelming majority. MEPs voted 537 in favour, 126 against, and with 19 abstentions.[17]

Pie chart showing EU revenue sources (2014)[18]

VAT-based resources (12.26%)

GNI-based resources (68.73%)

Traditional own resources (11.4%)

Other (6.92%)

Surplus from 2013 (0.7%)

The EU obtains its revenue from four main sources:

Traditional own resources[21] are taxes raised on behalf of the EU as a whole, principally import duties on goods brought into the EU. These are collected by the state where import occurs and passed on to the EU. States are allowed to keep a proportion of the revenue to cover administration (20%[22]). The European Commission operates a system of inspectors to investigate the collection of these taxes in member states and ensure compliance with the rules. The effect of a state failing to collect these taxes is that other states will have to contribute more to the budget, so there is a potential conflict of interest on the part of the collecting authorities. Countries are liable to make good any loss of revenue due to their own administrative failure.[21]

VAT-based own resources[21] are taxes on EU citizens based on the proportion of VAT levied in each member country. VAT rates and exemptions vary in different countries, so a formula is used to create the 'harmonised tax base', upon which the EU charge is levied. The starting point for calculations is the total VAT raised in a country. This is then adjusted using a weighted average of VAT rates applying in that country, producing the intermediate tax base. Further adjustments are made where there is a derogation from the VAT directive allowing certain goods to be zero-rated. The tax base is capped, such that it may not be greater than 50% of a country's gross national income (GNI).

Member countries generally pay 0.3% of their harmonised tax base into the budget,[22] but this is varied for some countries. The rate for Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden is 0.15% in the 2014-2020 period,[22] while Austria also had a reduced rate in the 2007-2013 period.[23]

Countries are required to make an account of VAT revenues to the EU before July after the end of the budget year. The EU examines the submission for accuracy, including control visits by officials from the Directorate-General for Budget and Directorate-General for Taxation, and reports back to the country concerned.

The country may then respond to any issues raised in the report, and negotiations continue until both sides are satisfied, or the matter may be referred to the European Court of Justice for a final ruling. The Advisory committee on own resources, which has representatives from each member state, also receives and discusses the reports. In 2006, nine countries were inspected by controllers, including five new member states who were participating in the procedure for the first time. It is anticipated that 11 countries will be visited in 2007. The EU may be working on figures for three years at any one time.

GNI-based own resources[21] currently forms the largest contribution to EU funding. A simple multiplier is applied to the calculated GNI for the country concerned. This is the last recourse for raising funding for a budget year, so the actual figure is adjusted within predetermined limits to obtain the budget total required. Revenue is currently capped at 1.23% of gross national income in the European Union as a whole.[24]

The GNI for own resource purposes is calculated by national accountants according to European law governing the sources and methods to compile GNI and the transmission of GNI data and related methodological information to the Commission (Eurostat). Basic information must be provided by the countries concerned to Eurostat before 22 September in the year following the budget year concerned.

Eurostat carries out information visits to the National Statistical Institutes forming part of the European Statistical System. Based on assessment reports by Eurostat, the Directorate-General for Budget (DG BUDG) of the Commission may notify to the Permanent Representative of the Member State concerned required corrections and improvements in the form of reservations on the country's GNI data. Payments are made monthly by member states to the commission. Own resources payments are made monthly as they are collected, but monthly instalments of VAT- and GNI-based returns are based upon the budget estimates made for that year, subject to later correction.

Other revenue[21] accounted for 6.9% of EU revenue in 2014.[25] This includes tax and deductions from EU staff remuneration, interest on deposits or late payments, payments from non-EU countries for certain programmes, underspent funding from community programs and any other surplus from the previous budget.

The EU budget has a number of correction mechanisms designed to re-balance excessive contribution by certain member states:

The United Kingdom withdrawal from the European Union has led the EU to reconsider its funding mechanisms, with the rebates likely to change.[26]

Approximately 94% of the EU budget funds programmes and projects both within member states and outside the EU.[27] Approximately 6% of the budget is used for administrative costs, and less than 3% is spent on EU civil servants' salaries.[28]

2006 EU expenditure in millions of euros (Total 106,576 million)

Regional support (30.4%)

Common Agricultural Policy (46.7%)

Internal policies (8.5%)

External actions (4.9%)

Administration (6.3%)

Compensations (1%)

Reserves (0.1%)

Pre-accession strategy (2.1%)

In the 2006 budget, the largest single expenditure item was due to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), with its direct aid, export refunds, storage and rural development and support and subsidies, which accounted for around 46.7% of the total budget. In 2014, CAP spending had decreased to 39%.[29]

Next in 2006 came the EU's structural funds, which are used to support specific regions in the EU, as part of EU's regional policy, which aims to reduce regional disparities in terms of income, wealth and opportunities. Europe's poorer regions receive most of the support, but all European regions are eligible for funding under the policy's various funds and programmes. In 2006 approximately 30.4% of the EU budget was used for such support. While the CAP spending is going down, the regional support is increasing, and is expected to reach almost 36% in 2013.[30]

Internal policies (training, youth, culture, audiovisual, media, information, energy, Euratom nuclear safeguards and environment, consumer protection, internal market, industry and Trans-European networks, research and technological development, other internal policies) took up around 8.5% in the 2006 budget.

External actions, i.e. EU's international activities outside the EU (development aid, peace keeping and security work, election observers etc.) accounted for 4.9% in 2006.

Finally, the pre-accession strategy, compensations and reserves brought up the rear of the budget, with approximately 2.1%, 1% and 0.1% respectively in 2006.

2014 EU expenditure in millions of euros (Total 142,496 million)

Growth (inc. infrastructure projects) (49.55%)

Natural resources (inc. CAP) (42.77%)

Security and citizenship (1.28%)

EU as a global partner (0.07%)

Administration (5.97%)

Compensations (0.02%)

Reserves (0%)

Special instruments (0.33%)

For the period 2014-2020, the EU budget is used for six main categories of expenditure:[31]

Net receipts or contributions vary over time, and there are various ways of calculating net contributions to the EU budget, depending, for instance, on whether countries' administrative expenditure is included. Also, one can use either absolute figures, the proportion of gross national income (GNI), or per capita amounts. Different countries may tend to favour different methods, to present their country in a more favourable light.[citation needed]

Go here to read the rest:
Budget of the European Union - Wikipedia

The term Democrat Party is an epithet for the Democratic Party of the United States,[3][4][5] used disparagingly by the party's opponents.[6] The following appeared in The New York Times in 1984:

The term 'Democrat Party' has been used in recent years by some right-wing Republicans on the ground that the term used by Democrats implies that they are the only true adherents of democracy.[7]

Language expert Roy Copperud said it was used by Republicans who disliked the implication that Democratic Party implied to listeners that Democrats "are somehow the anointed custodians of the concept of democracy". According to Oxford Dictionaries, the use of Democrat rather than the adjective Democratic

is in keeping with a longstanding tradition among Republicans of dropping the ic in order to maintain a distinction from the broader, positive associations of the adjective democratic with democracy and egalitarianism.[9]

Political commentator William Safire wrote in 1993 that the Democrat of Democrat Party "does conveniently rhyme with autocrat, plutocrat, and worst of all, bureaucrat".[10] Hendrik Hertzberg writes in The New Yorker:

Theres no great mystery about the motives behind this deliberate misnaming. 'Democrat Party' is a slur, or intended to bea handy way to express contempt. Aesthetic judgments are subjective, of course, but 'Democrat Party' is jarring verging on ugly. It fairly screams 'rat'.[11]

Pollster Frank Luntz tested the phrase with a focus group in 2001, and concluded that the only people who really disliked the epithet were highly partisan Democrats.[12] Political analyst Charlie Cook attributed modern use of the term to force of habit rather than a deliberate epithet by Republicans.[13] Journalist Ruth Marcus stated that Republicans likely only continue to employ the term because Democrats dislike it,[3] and Hertzberg calls use of the term "a minor irritation" and also "the partisan equivalent of flashing a gang sign".[11]

Among authors of dictionaries and usage guides who state that the use of Democrat as an adjective is ungrammatical are Roy H. Copperud, Bergen Evans, and William and Mary Morris. Morris and Morris argue, "it is the idiotic creation of some of the least responsible members of the Republican Party."[15]

Ruth Walker, the long-time language columnist for the Christian Science Monitor,[16] while stating that Democratic is the correct term in most instances, places the adjectival use of Democrat within a broader trend:

We're losing our inflectionsthe special endings we use to distinguish between adjectives and nouns, for instance. There's a tendency to modify a noun with another noun rather than an adjective. Some may speak of 'the Ukraine election' rather than 'the Ukrainian election' or 'the election in Ukraine', for instance. It's 'the Iraq war' rather than 'the Iraqi war', to give another example.[17]

According to the British newspaper The Economist,

The real reason 'Democrat Party' is wrong is not because it's ungrammatical, but because it's incorrect in another waythe party is simply not named the Democrat Party, but the Democratic Party. Calling it anything else is discourteous.[18]

The Oxford English Dictionary says the term was used by the London press as a synonym for the more common Democratic Party in 1890: "Whether a little farmer from South Carolina named Tillman is going to rule the Democrat Party in Americayet it is this, and not output, on which the proximate value of silver depends."[19] In American history, many parties were named by their opponents (Federalists, Loco-Focos, Know Nothings, Populists, Dixiecrats), including the Democrats themselves, as the Federalists in the 1790s used Democratic Party as a term of ridicule. Addressing a gathering of Michigan Republicans in 1889, New Hampshire Republican Congressman Jacob H. Gallinger said:

The great Democrat party, laying down the sceptre of power in 1860, after ruling this country under free trade for a quarter of a century, left our treasury bankrupt, and gave as a legacy to the Republican party, a gigantic rebellion and a treasury without a single dollar of money in it.[21]

The 1919 New Teachers' and Pupils' Cyclopaedia entry for Woodrow Wilson states that "In 1912, Wilson was the Democrat Party nominee for President..."[22] In July 14, 1922, a newspaper in Keytesville, Missouri, posted an advertisement for its primary elections with the Democratic candidates identified as "Representing: Democrat Party".[23]

The noun-as-adjective has been used by Republican leaders since the 1940s, and in most GOP national platforms since 1948.[citation needed] By the early 1950s the term was in widespread use among Republicans of all factions.[24] When Senator Thruston Ballard Morton became chairman of the Republican National Committee in 1959, he indicated that he had always said Democratic Party and would continue to do so, which contrasted with his predecessor, Meade Alcorn and National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman Barry Goldwater, both of whom used Democrat Party.[25] According to Congressional Quarterly, at the 1968 Republican National Convention "the GOP did revert to the epithet of 'Democrat' party. The phrase had been used in 1952 and 1956 but not in 1960 and 1964".[5]

According to William Safire, Minnesota Governor Harold Stassen, campaign manager to Republican Wendell Willkie during the 1940 presidential campaign, explained that because the Democratic Party was at that time partly controlled by undemocratic city bosses, "by [Frank] Hague in New Jersey, [Tom] Pendergast in Missouri and [Edward Joseph] Kelly-Nash in Chicago, [it] should not be called a 'Democratic Party.' It should be called the 'Democrat Party.'"

Columnist Russell Baker wrote in 1976:

The origin of this illiterate phrase, goes back, I believe to the era of Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy. [...] The chief trouble with 'the Democrat party' is that it makes the Republicans saying it sound both illiterate and coy, and, so, is like a shotgun that is all kick and no fire. [...] A party whose membership is down to 22 percent of the electorate, as the Republican party is, hardly needs ways to irritate voters from the opposing party whom it must seduce if it is to succeed.[27]

During the 1984 Republican National Convention, use of the term was a point of contention among the delegates.[28] when a member of the Republican platform committee asked unanimous consent to change the phrasing of a platform amendment to read Democrat Party instead of Democratic Party, New York Representative Jack Kemp objected, saying that would be "an insult to our Democratic friends" and the committee dropped the proposal.[7]

Newt Gingrich, in a campaign in the 1980s and 1990s to produce a Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives, relied heavily on words and phrases that cast Democrats in a negative light.[29] The phrase Democrat Party gained new currency when the Republican Party, led by Gingrich, gained control of the House of Representatives in 1994.[4]

In 1996, the wording throughout the Republican Party platform was changed from Democratic Party to Democrat Party: Republican leaders "explained they wanted to make the subtle point that the Democratic Party had become elitist".[30] During that same period, bumper stickers for the Democratic presidential campaign of Bill Clinton and Al Gore sometimes used the phrase "Vote Democrat".[10] A proposal to use the term in the August 2008 Republican platform for similar reasons was voted down, with leaders choosing to use Democratic Party. "We probably should use what the actual name is," said Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, the panel's chairman. "At least in writing."[30]

Following his inauguration in 2001, President George W. Bush often used the noun-as-adjective when referring to the Democratic party.[31] Ruth Marcus, an opinion writer and columnist for The Washington Post, wrote in 2006, "The derisive use of 'Democrat' in this way was a Bush staple during the recent campaign".[3]

Bush spoke of the "Democrat majority" in his 2007 State of the Union Address, although the advance copy that was given to members of Congress read "Democratic majority".[13][32] Democrats complained about the use of Democrat as an adjective in the address: John Podesta, White House Chief of Staff for Bush's predecessor Bill Clinton, argued that it was "like nails on a chalkboard," although Congressional historian Julian E. Zelizer argued that "It's hard to disentangle whether that's an intentional slight".[13] Political analyst Charlie Cook doubted it was a deliberate attempt to offend Democrats, saying Republicans "have been [using the term] so long that they probably don't even realize they're doing it".[13]

Bush joked about the issue in a February 4, 2007 speech to House Democrats, stating "Now look, my diction isn't all that good. I have been accused of occasionally mangling the English language. And so I appreciate you inviting the head of the Republic Party."[33][34]

Donald Trump has used the phrase repeatedly, both during his presidential campaign and as president.[35]

According to Media Matters for America, the "ungrammatical" and "partisan" use of the phrase Democrat Party has been replicated by the Associated Press, CNN, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and the Chicago Tribune.[36]

National Public Radio (NPR) directed its staff in 2010 to use the adjective Democratic rather than Democrat. According to Ron Elving, NPR's senior Washington editor, it was the organization's policy to call parties by the name that they use to refer to themselves, saying: "We should not refer to Democrat ideas or Democrat votes. Any deviation from that by NPR reporters on air or on line should be corrected".[38]

Delegates to the Democratic National Committee once proposed using "Publican Party" instead of "Republican Party". The committee failed to accept the proposal "explaining that Republican is the name by which the our opponents' product is known and mistrusted". Sherman Yellen suggested "The Republicants" as suitably comparable in terms of negative connotation in an April 29, 2007 Huffington Post commentary.[40] Other progressive blogs such as Daily Kos use the term "Republicon", to suggest Republicans "are con artists, evil, and after your money".[41][bettersourceneeded]

On the February 26, 2009 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews, Republican Representative Darrell Issa referred to "a Democrat Congress". The host, Chris Matthews, responded by saying:

Well, I think the Democratic Party calls itself the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party. Do we have to do this every night? Why do people talk like this? Is this just fighting words to get the name on?[42]

Issa denied that he intended to use "fighting words", to which Matthews replied, "They call themselves the Democratic Party. Let's just call people what they call themselves and stop the Mickey Mouse heresave that for the stump."[42]

In March 2009, after Representative Jeb Hensarling (RTexas) repeatedly used the phrase Democrat Party when questioning U.S. Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag, Representative Marcy Kaptur (DOhio) responded, saying:

Id like to begin by saying to my colleague from Texas that there isnt a single member on this side of the aisle that belongs to the 'Democrat Party'. We belong to the Democratic Party. So the party you were referring to doesnt even exist. And I would just appreciate the courtesy when youre referring to our party to refer to it as such.[43]

Originally posted here:
Democrat Party (epithet) - Wikipedia