|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens
Idle thoughts of a relatively libertarian Republican in Cambridge, MA, and whomever he invites. Mostly political.
"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures."
-- Daniel Webster
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunday, March 21, 2004 :::
I ran across this Reuters article, describing how Senators McCain and Lieberman are calling for more civility in the Bush and Kerry campaigns.
A pair of former presidential candidates from the major U.S. political parties appealed for more civil debate in the campaign on Sunday and warned that Americans will sit out the election if the current tone continues. ...
In the past week marking the one-year anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, the two traded charges in speeches and television ads. Vice President Dick Cheney challenged Kerry's ability to lead and criticized him for voting against $87 billion in additional funds for Iraq. Kerry accused Bush of misleading Americans about the extent of Saddam Hussein's weapons programs and the cost of the war.
It seems to me that these charges aren't really symmetrical. On the one hand, Cheney is making a judgment about Kerry's abilities -- something reasonable to do in a campaign, even if personal -- and criticizing Kerry on his voting record in Congress -- something entirely reasonable and something that, to my mind, is quite civil. I see nothing wrong with this.
Kerry, on the other hand, is accusing Bush of misleading the public, a pretty severe accusation about the President's character. He's impugning motives and this could be characterized as uncivil. Nevertheless, if he honestly believes that Bush lied to the American public, that's a legitimate campaign issue. He should have some facts handy to back up an accusation like that, though.
I don't think the public reacts well to anger in a candidate. Governor Dean is the most recent example of the phenomenon, but I submit also the example of Speaker Gingrich. While I don't recall him screaming at the top of his lungs, he was constantly critical of people and ideas when on TV and in the public spotlight and this gave him the reputation for being an "angry" person. Speaker Hastert, by contrast, seems downright avuncular. He appears on TV, smiling, taking about working happily with others and generally friendly things that appeal to the nonengaged voter whose exposure to politics is the evening news -- or part thereof.
When Bush is on TV, he's frequently smiling, and he tends to make positive statements. That shows either emotional maturity, good handling on the part of his campaign and image people, or both. Kerry always seems angry and this is an image problem that's going to hurt him.
::: posted by Eric at 2:19 PM
|
|
|
|
