Political Sound Bites and Negative Campaigning
Political sound bites....I hate them. They make me feel stupid. They make me feel the kind of stupid you feel after listening to country music or like you've just been lectured by John Kerry. I guess they are necessary because every candidate wants to be all things to all people and if you say anything that takes a real stand, that people can sink their teeth into, it gets harder to spin what you said later on. And if you dare to take a real stand on issues you will go the way of Dennis Kucinech or Ron Paul (Ron's already gone, he just doesn't know it yet).
Either elections are getting dumber or I'm getting smarter. Politicians used to sound deep to me, like they had a real grasp on the issues, like they knew more then I did, and they should. Now I hear them and they just keep recycling the same old sound bites and cliches. They have a set answer for every possible question, they just sort of change the words around each time they use it. It seems that the only time you get any specifics is when things get a little heated, like they have been between Obama and Hillary. I say let them take the gloves off, at least they are forced to say something (when under attack) that hasn't been rehearsed a thousand times.
I love seeing Bill Clinton get angry. I hope Hillary wins the primaries just so I get to see Bill in full attack mode against the republicans. I think maybe he's got a lot of pent up anger over how he was treated during his last term in office. Ken Star and 125 million bucks spent to investigate him and they come up with nothing? He lies about sex and faces impeachment? After all that Bush has gotten away with in the last 7 years, Bill Clinton should be angry. A lot of us are plenty angry and if Bill Clinton can express that anger for us, then great, unleash the man.
I hope that whoever the democrat is that wins the primaries, they take a lesson from Bill Clinton. Dukakas, Gore, and Kerry all got beat, in part, because they tried to walk the high road. They were slow to answer false allegations, if they answered them at all. Dukakas let George Bush senior call him unpatriotic in the debates and ignored it. Al Gore let George W. call him a habitual liar. When John Kerry came under attack he started yawning. I remember when Clinton was running in 92, James Carvel put an instant response policy into place that was very effective in answering all attacks within the hour. Personally, I would like to see the candidates stick more to issues and use less negative campaign strategies. But if your going to get attacked, and especially if it is an unfounded attack, you've got to fight back.
I'm also wondering what issue the republicans are going to get on the ballots this year to bring out the good old boys and the family values crowd. Gay marriage was very effective in the past. It will probably have something to do with guns, multiple wives, euthanasia, abortion, or sex with animals, I don't know. Wouldn't it be something if we had an election that was just about the issues, about the real problems this country is facing? And wouldn't it be something if politicians spoke in detail about what they would actually do to fix things and weren't afraid of alienating those who would disagree with them?
Comments
You may be expecting too much from politicians if you want things to change. They react and adjust to the wants/needs of the voting public. They lie about each other because we let them and we reward them for doing it.
The two biggest lie/stereotypes going right now are that democrats are un-patriotic and republicans are racist. Each side attacks the other with this because the public has let the perception stick.
The truth is that politicians will never give us substance unless we demand it. When a politician tells us we need higher taxes, we should respond with "really? What tax rate do you think we should pay? How will this money be spent and how do we know you won't be back next year asking for another tax increase?"
Every politican running for office claims they are for change. Change for what? Many talk about health care or energy but don't tell us anything about what they would do to fix these problems. But to our discredit, when they do present their solutions, most of us aren't listening. When the solutions work, we pat ourselves on the back for having elected the right guy, and when the solutions don't work, we blame the politician and accuse them of having lied to us when we never really heard their proposal in the first place. If we had, we wouldn't have known better anyhow.
The people have to educate themselves or democracy is a farce. The rate we're going within 50 years we'll probably be electing wrestling federation celebs for President. Much like that movie, Idiocracy, which is one of the scariest future prediction movies I've seen in some time.
Ugh. I'm getting into negative thinking. Gotta stop that. Smile Joe, smile.
Joe's reply....I know, it's like I've said before...maybe democracy has a built in self destruct mechanism, 300 years tops....I hope not
Posted by: Dane Langston | January 28, 2008 03:55 PM