Elections
Last night saw the end of the Senate elections over here in the USA. Typically these types of things are a bit boring but when I compared it to the elections in the UK I realised its very different and quite entertaining. I’m sure Americans find it boring because it’s the same thing over and over for them but for me the campaign tactics and TV commercials were fun.
In the UK you get to see ‘Party Political Broadcasts’ in the build up to an election. A member of the Labor party will pop on the screen and tell you what a good job they are doing and what they plan to do if you vote for them. Over here it’s very different. The big vote over here was for the State Senator. The race was between Jim Talent (who already held the job) and his challenger Claire McCaskill. Rather than Jim or Claire coming on the TV telling you want a great job they will do, you actually get something like this:
Scene: Sat in what appears to be his house. Very homely warm setting, this guy can be trusted, he looks nice.
Jim: “Claire McCaskill says she will audit old peoples homes and end the abuse there. She also says she will clean up the accounts of these old peoples homes and bring about change. She’s lying. Claire married an owner of a chain of old peoples homes and ordered that his businesses not be audited. She also wets the bed and smells. My name is Jim Talent and I authorise this message”.
Or you get:
Scene: Very similar. She looks friendly, like a member of the family perhaps. She could be an Aunty or something.
Claire: “Jim Talent says he supports Missouri. He says he votes for Missouri when he votes in Washington. He’s lying. He votes with Bush 95% of the time. He says he is against the war in Iraq but then voted to keep our troops out there and did you know he sleeps with his teddy bear and ‘forgot’ to pay taxes the last few years? Naughty naughty”
That’s the big difference. It seems they can say what they like about each other and as Election Day approached the mud throwing got worse and worse. I spoke to some people at work to try and establish the ground rules for these commercials. Can they say anything they like or is there a line? I was given this example.
In another state one of the candidates ran an advert saying his competitor called sex lines and was an all round not so nice guy who needed to hear the voice of some dodgy woman on the other end of the phone. Your basic sleaze campaign. Can they just say this or do they need some proof? It turns out you do need something to base your claim on. This particular candidate had managed to get hold of the phone records from a hotel stay his opponent made. One of the numbers on the list was indeed a sex line. He put 2 and 2 together, got 5 and ran the commercial. When the phone records were looked at again for more than 5 seconds it became clear that the sex line number was one digit away from the campaign hotline and one of the candidates aids had misdialed the number. The so called sex line call lasted 10 seconds or so and the correct number was dialed immediately afterwards and the call lasted many minutes. An innocent mistake by some assistant that led to the sleazy commercial. There was no point trying to defend it on TV as it would just draw more attention to the issue. This seems to be the way it goes. Say what you like so long as it very loosely based on something, anything!!
So compared to the UK, a US election is very different and very entertaining. Another big difference is the voters ability to influence policy directly. Not only do you get to vote for your favorite person over here you also get to say yes or no to various proposals. For example:
1. Do you think we should spend a load of money building new football stadiums?
2. Do you think we should allow stem cell research?
3. Do you think we should raise the tax on cigarettes?
4. Do you think we should raise the minimum wage?
5. Do you want to pay more tax for better roads?
So even if you favorite candidate is against ‘Question 2’ you can still vote for them but then vote no for Q2. The ability to vote on issues then spawns off another set of TV commercials campaigning for your Yes or No vote on issues. On the stem cell research you had opponents showing commercials saying a vote for yes will mean human cloning and the formation of an army of clones that will take over the world. In the Yes camp you had celebrities begging you to vote Yes so doctors can cure all the worlds’ illnesses and allow you to live to be 300. Again all the ads feel made up and there is very little fact to back up any claims.
Voting over here is tough if you want to make a well informed choice. There are so many issues on each ballot you don’t stand a chance. You end up voting for the person who looks best on TV or on the made up claim that stuck in your mind. I guess in that way it’s not far from the UK really.
Last night saw the end of the Senate elections over here in the USA. Typically these types of things are a bit boring but when I compared it to the elections in the UK I realised its very different and quite entertaining. I’m sure Americans find it boring because it’s the same thing over and over for them but for me the campaign tactics and TV commercials were fun.
In the UK you get to see ‘Party Political Broadcasts’ in the build up to an election. A member of the Labor party will pop on the screen and tell you what a good job they are doing and what they plan to do if you vote for them. Over here it’s very different. The big vote over here was for the State Senator. The race was between Jim Talent (who already held the job) and his challenger Claire McCaskill. Rather than Jim or Claire coming on the TV telling you want a great job they will do, you actually get something like this:
Scene: Sat in what appears to be his house. Very homely warm setting, this guy can be trusted, he looks nice.
Jim: “Claire McCaskill says she will audit old peoples homes and end the abuse there. She also says she will clean up the accounts of these old peoples homes and bring about change. She’s lying. Claire married an owner of a chain of old peoples homes and ordered that his businesses not be audited. She also wets the bed and smells. My name is Jim Talent and I authorise this message”.
Or you get:
Scene: Very similar. She looks friendly, like a member of the family perhaps. She could be an Aunty or something.
Claire: “Jim Talent says he supports Missouri. He says he votes for Missouri when he votes in Washington. He’s lying. He votes with Bush 95% of the time. He says he is against the war in Iraq but then voted to keep our troops out there and did you know he sleeps with his teddy bear and ‘forgot’ to pay taxes the last few years? Naughty naughty”
That’s the big difference. It seems they can say what they like about each other and as Election Day approached the mud throwing got worse and worse. I spoke to some people at work to try and establish the ground rules for these commercials. Can they say anything they like or is there a line? I was given this example.
In another state one of the candidates ran an advert saying his competitor called sex lines and was an all round not so nice guy who needed to hear the voice of some dodgy woman on the other end of the phone. Your basic sleaze campaign. Can they just say this or do they need some proof? It turns out you do need something to base your claim on. This particular candidate had managed to get hold of the phone records from a hotel stay his opponent made. One of the numbers on the list was indeed a sex line. He put 2 and 2 together, got 5 and ran the commercial. When the phone records were looked at again for more than 5 seconds it became clear that the sex line number was one digit away from the campaign hotline and one of the candidates aids had misdialed the number. The so called sex line call lasted 10 seconds or so and the correct number was dialed immediately afterwards and the call lasted many minutes. An innocent mistake by some assistant that led to the sleazy commercial. There was no point trying to defend it on TV as it would just draw more attention to the issue. This seems to be the way it goes. Say what you like so long as it very loosely based on something, anything!!
So compared to the UK, a US election is very different and very entertaining. Another big difference is the voters ability to influence policy directly. Not only do you get to vote for your favorite person over here you also get to say yes or no to various proposals. For example:
1. Do you think we should spend a load of money building new football stadiums?
2. Do you think we should allow stem cell research?
3. Do you think we should raise the tax on cigarettes?
4. Do you think we should raise the minimum wage?
5. Do you want to pay more tax for better roads?
So even if you favorite candidate is against ‘Question 2’ you can still vote for them but then vote no for Q2. The ability to vote on issues then spawns off another set of TV commercials campaigning for your Yes or No vote on issues. On the stem cell research you had opponents showing commercials saying a vote for yes will mean human cloning and the formation of an army of clones that will take over the world. In the Yes camp you had celebrities begging you to vote Yes so doctors can cure all the worlds’ illnesses and allow you to live to be 300. Again all the ads feel made up and there is very little fact to back up any claims.
Voting over here is tough if you want to make a well informed choice. There are so many issues on each ballot you don’t stand a chance. You end up voting for the person who looks best on TV or on the made up claim that stuck in your mind. I guess in that way it’s not far from the UK really.
posted by alongwayfromhome at 12:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home