Through all of the cantankerous and inaccurate political ads hitting airwaves this fall, some candidates will emerge as winners in November. The question is: who loses?
Like it or not, each instance of negative campaigning that blatantly crosses the lines of ethical responsibility, above-board political decorum, and basic truthfulness resonates as an opportunity for Americans to choose whether or not the tone of politics is acceptable collectively. Considering the level of crisis that we are facing in this nation – from economic instability to social upheaval through urban violence- it should be an easy choice to make. Any distraction that shifts the primary attention of candidates and voters away from immediately overcoming the obstacles that we face could be seen as a sign of a failure of servant, focused leadership. Instead, these ads and other forms of campaign messages from both sides of the aisle are condoned (if not flat-out encouraged) as long as they benefit one’s position of choice.
That, in turn, makes Americans take the losing position on advancing the country overall.
Say what you want about the Citizens United decision from 2010, the Romney Super PACS from Iowa in 2011, or President Obama’s reversal with public financing in 2008. The atmosphere to strive with these campaign strategies can only be sustained if the voting public supports the short-sighted, “entertain me” attitude that is necessary to make catchy, emotionally-based ads more popular (and more important to a campaign) than informative, truthful ads.
Catch more of Lenny McAllister’s “87 Days to Nov. 6: Obama, Romney and Winning the Olympics of Politics” on Politic365
See more now available in
Also now available on Kindle