Tuesday, October 2, 2012

On the Offensive

In any competition there are ways to out shine your opponent, depending on the type of competition there are certain strategies which yield the best results. In a political setting it appears to me there are two primary strategies which are commonly used when running for office. The first is gaining support and votes based on your party's platform and policies while promoting the beliefs that you yourself hold. The second is trying to tare down your opponent by digging up dirt and sullying their name rather than running on their policies. I believe that most people would prefer that politicians run a clean race where they build themselves up, rather than constantly putting out attack ads and searching for dirt on their opposition that has nothing to do with the policies and plans that would be in place if they were elected. Topics like the middle name of the candidate, the fact that Barack Obama's middle name is
Hussein has no baring on wether or not he is the best candidate for presidency.

In recent years I've noticed that political campaigns seem to be getting more and agressive, the ads we see on T.V. seem to be attacks on the other party for the majority of the time and rarely focus on the plans of the party. We can look to the American election in process right now for a number of current examples that showcase the types of ads most voters are subject to. Both parties have a number of a attack ads, this ad uses great imagery to portray Obama in a dark light but at no point mentions how the Republicans expect to resolve the problems they highlight. Democrats are no victim in this case as the run plenty of attack ads themselves. The first video on this page endorsed by Obama highlights personal finances of Mitt Romney in an attempt to make him look like an elitest who pays minimal taxes despite his great wealth. Whether or not this is true that ad has nothing to do with Obama or the policies he enforces or even the policies of Romney. These sort of ads are seen in Canadian politics as well more and more.

I realize that certain flaws in the policies or tactics of the other party should be brought to the attention of the public, but I don't need sinister music and dark imagery to go along with it. I need the facts and how you pan to do it better. I find this campaigning strategy, of taring down the opponent rather irritating. As a voter all I want to know are the facts, what are you going to do if you get elected? I don't care if you have a lot of money or what religion you believe in. (An issue we saw in the forefront of the republican primaires that had a few publicly mormon candidates.) The only thing that I as a voter want to know is how you are going to help me and the rest of the public if you are elected.

1 comment:

  1. The bells and whistles of campaign adds such as their use of dramatic music and ominous images, are in my opinion just sleazy ways of attempting to cover up the fact that this form of campaigning is nothing more than mud-slinging. These attempts are also foolish because any person with even the slightest ability to criticize think can see right through the charades. I think this practice also leaves politicians in a poor light because anyone who can criticly object, will know realize how low they are willing to go to get ahead, even some going as far as blatantly lying about opponent's personal lives just to stifle a few extra votes. The practice is completely pathetic and we should expect more from the leaders of our government than playground level name-calling and rumor spreading.

    ReplyDelete