The cores of both parties have that component. Both parties exploit those people, to some extent. But it's silly to ignore that there are people in that contingent who are "naturally" (for lack of a better term) aligned with the rhetoric/positions of their default party. Rural Christians who love guns aren't exactly beloved by the modern left. Such people can avoid conservative blowhards and still come away, correctly, assuming there isn't much place for you in the Democratic party.
I don't doubt the influence of Rush. I'm not a Rush guy but I've listened to plenty of conservative talk radio in my lifetime. But people are drawn to those voices, rather than the similarly incendiary voices on the left, for some reason. Often, it's probably because Rush is already speaking their language.
There is no equivalent on the left to right wing radio. Nothing even close. Right wing radio is a place where folks like Rush speak wildly polarized views completely unchallenged for three (four?) hours a day. His program (along with many others) is filled with conspiracy theories, falsehoods, half truths, and fear mongering about the pure evil that is the Democratic party in this country according to him.
He absolutely demonizes the left in this country every single day, completely unchallenged. It is propaganda. It's entirely uncredible, yet it's the most popular radio show in America.
Michael Medved is like the Shep Smith of conservative radio. At least he maintains a shred of credibility by stopping callers when they go off on wild, and widely accepted right wing propaganda that simply isn't true. I think he's somewhat hated because of this.
People on the right think NPR is the equivalent on the left to their local conservative propaganda station. I have had this conversation many times over, and it's complete ignorance to equate them.
