Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.
We’re less than a week into the official Obama/Biden vs. Romney/Ryan – the only two party candidates considered newsworthy – matchup, and the two campaigns have already moved to the dog story level. No offense meant to dogs, or dog lovers, but this (not unusual) low level of campaign marketing stupidity is one more indication of how the Candidates view the Electorate.
From Ben Smith at Buzzfeed: Why The Presidential Campaign Got So Mean Tuesday: Mirror image campaigns run away from policy. Phasers set on kill.
Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan was supposed to transform the 2012 presidential campaign away from what Politico called the ‘smallest’ campaign ever into something grand and honorable. …
‘It’s essentially a choice by Mitt Romney to say sure, let’s have a big debate about the big choices facing the American economy and American spending,’ said CNN’s John King.
The Obama campaign, too, stopped talking about horses and tax returns for a moment to lick its lips at the prospect of a policy debate Democrats believe they can win … .
Three days later, the campaign has reached its ugliest, most fevered moment. President Obama himself invoked an old story about Romney strapping a dog to the roof of his car. The Chairman of the Republican National Committee shot back with a jibe about Obama having eaten dog as a schoolboy in Indonesia.
Nothing unusual about such “ugly” campaign stupidity, but then, that’s the problem: it’s frequently the level of “let me tell you why you should vote for me” we’re suppose to listen to, and base a voting decision upon.
Smith noted other “ugly” language: Biden suggests the GOP wants to
… put voters back ‘in chains.’ Romney demanded Obama takes his campaign of ‘division and anger and hate back to Chicago.’ Obama’s spokesman called him ‘unhinged.’
The “ugly” atmosphere of stupidity quickly made its presence felt from Facebook to Twitter to bloggy comments to old fashion letters to the editor, in print.
Smith continues:
The campaigns had not been, to this point, parallel, but now they’re dark mirror images. …
Obama still doesn’t want to talk about the economy. Romney doesn’t want to talk about Medicare.
And so they have found something else to talk about: one another.
Which leaves the Electorate where? As Vast Left put it in an August 13 Facebook post:
2012 Election: A ticket that wants to destroy the safety net vs. one that will do it with sober reluctance.
Meanwhile, in Columbus, Ohio, one example of some of the Electorate working to get beyond the stupid ugly. Via Student Power 2012:
Students Converge At Obama Office To Reclaim Voice
Students from across the country marched from Ohio State University Student Union to President Obama’s campaign office to hold a press conference yesterday (August 13), calling into question the injustices of our current economic and political system. …
The demonstration highlighted how our electoral system and politicians have failed our youth on the critical issues of education, gender equality, racial justice, environmental sustainability, and basic respect for human rights. Neither party has the audacity to confront these injustices, nor do they attempt to facilitate any type of connection with us on these issues, which disproportionately affect women, LGBTQ people, youth, and people of color. …
Along with gender and sexuality injustice, we have learned that no matter who we vote for, we cannot avoid the controlling interests of corporations such as Goldman Sachs and Exxon Mobil dominating our political process. …
This fall, regardless of where we lie on the political spectrum, it is crucial that we come together on campuses across the country to reclaim our future before it’s too late. Join us November 14th – 21st as part of a global week of student action, demonstrating that we in the U.S. are committed to global justice and the international student movement. Here. Us. Now.
Okay, I know we have to pay some attention to Romney/Ryan/Obama/Biden, if for no other reason than they have a lock on the WH. But there is a great deal more going on and being said than what’s coming from the Corporate Campaigns. As a part of the efforts to break the Duopoly stranglehold – and because we really are in very big trouble – I hereby (and for the umpteenth time) suggest also listening to other voices.
The Next Election: High Stake Outcomes Based on Non-issues, Paul Craig Roberts;
Will 2012 be the Final Election of Lesser Evilism?, Shamus Cooke; On Politics, Occupy, the Tea Party and the Global Financial Crisis”, Noam Chomsky and Sebastian Meyer; NYC Activists Give Spectra An Unwelcoming Party, OWS; Single-Payer Champions Out-Hawk Ryan on Deficit, Sharon Johnson; The Democratic Party Sleeps on FDR’s Legacy, Ralph Nader; Social Security, at 77, Under Fierce Attack, Bernie Sanders; Ten Reasons I’m Not with Barack, Russell.
I’m starting to wish it was Wednesday, November 7th, 2012 to be done with these campaigns. I’m really starting to get sick of all of it and I’ve been a politial junkie for years but this campaign is starting to wear out the welcome mat for me. And, it’ just not the candidates and their surrogates, it’s the media as well.
Here is an eye-opening report. http://tinyurl.com/92qzpfa
I agree with what you’re saying in general, but highlight the “it’s the media as well” piece. I read an article somewhere recently — wish I could remember who and where — about the significance of the change from referring to the “press” to referring to the “media.” Profit trumps everything, and entertainment is more profitable than thoughtful news coverage.
Thanks for the link. “Unlikely voters” should be something that gets the Duopoly thinking that just maybe, “we’re doing something wrong.” It won’t, of course, but it should.
With all the folks who have been warning that this would happen, you’d think they’d be used to the idea by now. As we’ve observed many times, the Democrats didn’t take care of their base, and now their base can’t, or won’t, take care of them. This really isn’t rocket science, yet some of the so-called experts in that report seem to be positively mystified.
Probably shows just how isolated they are from the rest of the country.
We need Richard Pryor to come back and run a None Of The Above campaign.
Three billion dollars spent to elect Obama or Romney reminds me of the billions spent to convince people to eat McDonald’s french fries instead of Burger King.
Richard Pryor, along with a few others, to make the elephant in the room, and the emperor with no clothes, visible, would be very welcomed.
McDonald’s and Burger King. Coke and Pepsi. Republicans and Democrats …
Profit trumps everything, and entertainment is more profitable than thoughtful news coverage.
Yes. I don’t know if this is true any longer but there was a time when CBC, NBC and ABC broadcast channels (not cable) used to treat the news broadcast as a lost leader and separated it from the profit portion of the entertainment business. It was an independent arm not worried about the bottom line because the profits made from the entertainment side of the ledger subsidized the news much like Cspan is subsidized by all the other broadcast and cable stations.
And, I think that’s one reason IIRC, the debates run by the League of Women Voters were much better than the ones run by the duopolies today. I’m not sure though.
Nevertheless, the profit motive removed from the news department equation makes all the difference in the quality and independence of what we see broadcast even if they are as stingy as they were 20 years ago regarding how much time is allocated to the national news but it was better. Also, there was more investigative work done unlike today. That is why the work of Jane Meyer and Dana Priest is so bloody important because it’s so rare and the work these women do invaluable and first rate.
Pointing out the difference of the profit motive makes regarding investigative work is very important. I think it’s tricky to trust what’s “reported.”
It hasn’t been for quite some time. Back when 60 Minutes was really popular, CBS noted that they could make a profit from news. Pretty soon all the networks expected that would happen, and that’s one of the big reasons the news is the way it is now. Well, that and the consolidation of the news business into a handfull of corporations.
Just to highlight this one: “the consolidation of the news business into a handfull of corporations.”
Profit trumps everything, and entertainment is more profitable than thoughtful news coverage. Joyce
Brilliantly said, Joyce!
Just want to make this clear: the first sentence in my second post above are the observations of Joyce to which I’m responding.
You can set those quote off using the BLOCKQUOTE tag. Like so:
<BLOCKQUOTE> Hello, World! </BLOCKQUOTE>
looks like:
This eliminates the tricky problem of trying to figure out how that little quote button works in the editor.
No need to capitialize the blockquote strings, BTW. In fact, there’s still a lot of buggy software on the Internet that doesn’t parse the capitalized strings properly. It’s really better not to.
“the consolidation of the news business into a handfull of corporations.”
The “Big Six” as I refer to them…that was at least six years ago, I havent kept up with them lately……Disney…GE/Com Cast(this merger happened about two yrs ago)…Murdock…Time Warner…Viacom…and if I remember correctly, Berttlesman.
Bought , sold, and paid for by the very “corporatepolitical “TRASH” we’ve so dutifully “voted” for every dog and pony “election” show for the last 40 years!
And even though I may sound “offensive” sometimes… just remember I love you all!