In general I’m a surface person. You know those folks who always know what’s going to happen next in the movie? Not me. I guess I could if I tried, but generally I’m happy to let it wash over me. A similar thing is true of politics; I’ll be happy to question the substance of a candidate’s argument, but I rarely question the way that the message is being put across, or the tactics that are being used. Not uncritical, just…shallow.
So I was pleased twice-over to notice the recent use by the Kerry campaign of the “wrong choices” idea. This seems to fit two main requirements of a campaign theme very well; gets to the point quickly, but is flexible enough to cover a lot of ground without inducing fatigue. It can be applied to the war, the economy, health care, pretty much anywhere. And in each area you can talk about the details of why the decision was wrong, and what you’d do right, without losing the overarching theme.
Compare this to the Bush campaigns theme of “resolute commitment” (and varieties thereof). They all boil down to “keep on with more of the same”. That’s a nice simple message, but it doesn’t allow for interesting discussions in each area. Health care? “More of the same”. Iraq? “More of the same”. That may be exactly the right policy decision, but it’s just not very interesting because we already know what the same is. That’s one of the reasons why the President suffered in the first debate; once he’d asked us to trust him a few times it got a bit repetitive.
So, point to Kerry campaign for a wise course, and ten points to me for lifting my head off the couch enough to notice.