The Obama campaign has released a pretty aggressive attack on Romney. The ad clearly attempts to frame Romney as everything that is wrong with America - a vulture capital guy who ships US jobs overseas to make a buck and then hides his money in off-shore accounts so he doesn't have to pay taxes.
The ad will be effective in rallying Obama's base, which he needs to do, but will most likely fall flat with independents (who ultimately choose the president, pushing either the left or the right over the top).
There are bigger issues with this kind of negative campaigning though:
1) Romney didn't break any laws. Say what you will, Romney didn't break any laws. So if you don't like what Romney did, then change the system right?
2) Nothing has changed. One big problem for Obama is that everything he is attacking Romney for are all things that people are still doing under the Obama presidency. If all these things are so bad (and I think they are) then why hasn't Obama done anything about them over the past four years? There are thousands of 'Romney's' out there in the world today and Obama hasn't lifted a finger to do anything about them.
3) Character attacks on a Mormon are risky. One of the issues with trying to make Romney look like the big bad wolf is that he has plenty of ways to counter that portrayal. He appears to have a well rounded family, he has a history of giving to the Mormon church, he volunteered much of his time helping others while in the church when he was a young man, and in 2010/2011 he gave away 16 per cent of his income to charity (mostly the Mormon church mind you).
Point is Romney isn't some cocaine-snorting, prostitute- addicted wall street banker who gets up every day and tries to figure out ways of screwing over the world economy just to make a buck.
So the ad will be effective with Obama's base, who will eagerly believe that 'their' guy is a saint and the 'other' guy is a sinner, but that's about it.
The real intent of this ad is two fold though:
1) Rally Democrat turn-out. If Obama can successfully tar Romney as being the near Devil himself, then perhaps Democrats will turn out in numbers to make sure Romney doesn't win.
2) Voter suppression. If Obama can tear Romney down enough, then perhaps independents and even some Republicans, while not voting for Obama, will simply not bother to vote.
Ironically, Romney will probably do the same thing to Obama. So we've got a mud-slinging 2012 race in the making which probably will lead to low voter turn out (most likely in equal measure for both men).
I'm not a fan of Romney or Obama myself (not that it matters given I'm Canadian). But neither of these guys will fix anything. Both are beholden to special interests and will continue to protect their interests over those of the average American.
From a PR perspective though, it will be interesting to see if either candidate can become president in 2012 with a brand that isn't torn to shreds. If Obama wins, half the country will be up in arms. If Romney wins, the other half will be up in arms.
That's why negative campaigning is a no-win for anyone in the end. Sure someone 'wins' the presidency, but with half the country hating their guts because they've been exposed to an endless stream of propaganda portraying the winner as evil and the worst thing that could ever happen to the country.
The ad will be effective in rallying Obama's base, which he needs to do, but will most likely fall flat with independents (who ultimately choose the president, pushing either the left or the right over the top).
There are bigger issues with this kind of negative campaigning though:
1) Romney didn't break any laws. Say what you will, Romney didn't break any laws. So if you don't like what Romney did, then change the system right?
2) Nothing has changed. One big problem for Obama is that everything he is attacking Romney for are all things that people are still doing under the Obama presidency. If all these things are so bad (and I think they are) then why hasn't Obama done anything about them over the past four years? There are thousands of 'Romney's' out there in the world today and Obama hasn't lifted a finger to do anything about them.
3) Character attacks on a Mormon are risky. One of the issues with trying to make Romney look like the big bad wolf is that he has plenty of ways to counter that portrayal. He appears to have a well rounded family, he has a history of giving to the Mormon church, he volunteered much of his time helping others while in the church when he was a young man, and in 2010/2011 he gave away 16 per cent of his income to charity (mostly the Mormon church mind you).
Point is Romney isn't some cocaine-snorting, prostitute- addicted wall street banker who gets up every day and tries to figure out ways of screwing over the world economy just to make a buck.
So the ad will be effective with Obama's base, who will eagerly believe that 'their' guy is a saint and the 'other' guy is a sinner, but that's about it.
The real intent of this ad is two fold though:
1) Rally Democrat turn-out. If Obama can successfully tar Romney as being the near Devil himself, then perhaps Democrats will turn out in numbers to make sure Romney doesn't win.
2) Voter suppression. If Obama can tear Romney down enough, then perhaps independents and even some Republicans, while not voting for Obama, will simply not bother to vote.
I'm not a fan of Romney or Obama myself (not that it matters given I'm Canadian). But neither of these guys will fix anything. Both are beholden to special interests and will continue to protect their interests over those of the average American.
From a PR perspective though, it will be interesting to see if either candidate can become president in 2012 with a brand that isn't torn to shreds. If Obama wins, half the country will be up in arms. If Romney wins, the other half will be up in arms.
That's why negative campaigning is a no-win for anyone in the end. Sure someone 'wins' the presidency, but with half the country hating their guts because they've been exposed to an endless stream of propaganda portraying the winner as evil and the worst thing that could ever happen to the country.
Comments
Post a Comment