This is the political season in the United States. Sadly, the season has been in effect for months and still has many months to go.
I know that negative political advertising is more effective than positive, which is in itself a very sad commentary on Americans and the depths of their thinking and the limits of their attention spans, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. Although all of the Republican candidates and their super-PACs (political action committees) are guilty of such advertising (and the Democrats will join them as the fall campaign gets closer), I’d like to see an “independent” PAC take on negative advertising.
Perhaps an ad should be run along the following lines, with equal time for all candidates who use negative advertising —
The background imagery would be the candidate whose negative ads are the subject of this ad, in this case Mitt Romney, and some of the candidate’s misstatements. The overnarration would run along these lines:
Why does Mitt Romney use negative ads? Is it because not even he can find anything positive or good to say about his beliefs and positions?
Why does Mitt Romney distort the truth about what others have said? Is it because Mitt Romney cannot tell lie from truth?
What kind of president would Mitt Romney be? How would America know whether or not he was lying to it?
Negative ads make candidates untrustworthy; presidents shouldn’t be untrustworthy.
Needless to say, one could substitute — currently — any of the Republican candidates for Mitt Romney, and I suspect that come the Republican vs. Democrat battle in the fall, one will be able to add Barack Obama to the list of players.
If I were to create a negative ad to support a candidate, I think I would use the following tag line (substituting, of course, the name of the candidate I was being negative about), which could also be a bumper sticker:
Mitt Romney — bringing America to her knees, one lie at a time!
(And for any of you politicians or politically oriented folk who are thinking about coopting these ideas, remember that they are copyrighted. I know politicians and their most fervent supporters often ignore copyright, but it really isn’t a good idea to do so.)