how low can you go?

Believe it or not, over the long term, political discourse is getting a lot less nasty on average.

political parody

In every major election postmortem, there's always a mention of how negative the campaigns were. Political historians consider 2004 to be one of the nastiest elections ever. In 2006, the attack ads were amazingly brutal. And in this election, the RNC and its affiliate groups pulled out all the stops to paint Obama as the worst thing to happen to this world since Cthulhu walked the land and made war with the Elder Things.

With the dust finally settling down and Obama emerging with what can only be called a decisive victory of 349 electoral votes and 52% of the popular vote, the question is how low can you go until the negative campaign tactics start backfiring? Was Obama's win a side effect of the GOP's negativity and obsessive focus on trying to demonize him and his supporters? If you checked John McCain's site during the campaign, usually three of the four front page stories were a shot at Obama.

Let's not forget Sarah Palin's insulting speech in which she divided the nation into real America and fake America. (For those curious, I'm not a real American because I don't live in a small town.) By focusing the whole election on whether or not people like Barack Obama, could the Republicans have shot themselves in the foot? Did they try to tear down a charismatic opponent and were so aggressive, they muted their own candidate and offered nothing in exchange?

But in retrospect, this election wasn't the most negative ever fought. That dubious distinction goes to the 1800 campaign in which John Adams openly called Thomas Jefferson an ugly hermaphrodite who slept with his slaves and was in return labeled with a string of racial slurs that questioned his character, upbringing and family. Compared to the vicious exchanges of the early to mid 19th century laden with racism, sexism and snobbery, today's campaigns are almost docile. If anything, we've gotten far more respectful and civil over the last 150 years.

So while toxic attack ads on TV seem incessant and bookstore shelves are littered with political hatchet jobs or promotional fluff pieces, we've been getting better at how far we take our public discourse. This should be good news if you lament the venom and bitterness in politics today. The future might get a lot less nasty. Though you should probably be prepared to wait another century or so…

  archived from wowt
              
# politics // attack ads / elections / political campaign


  show comments
latest reads

how to endanger the future of space flight for status and profit

CEOs and space faring powers are treating low Earth orbit as their personal playgrounds, much to the horror of space agencies.
how to endanger the future of space flight for status and profit

why your boss is obsessed with a.i. past the point of sanity

Not only is the C-suite not immune to AI psychosis, they seem to be primed to suffer the worst of it as their employees duck and cover.
why your boss is obsessed with a.i. past the point of sanity

why so many of us are just not that into chatbots

AI adoption is at an all time high, but opinion of AI keeps on tumbling with every poll and study on the subject.
why so many of us are just not that into chatbots

no, your chatbots aren't secretly marxists at heart

But they can and do detect and complain about unfair treatment when asked, according to an experiment by Stanford researchers.
no, your chatbots aren't secretly marxists at heart

how the right wing took over social media

Right wing content has a major advantage on social media. But we can do something about that with a very simple change in our habits.
how the right wing took over social media

no, we still don't know why t. rex had little arms

Popular science outlets continue to do a terrible job of explaining studies on primeval evolution and pretending we have answers we don't.
no, we still don't know why t. rex had little arms