Out of the millions of bright and eager Democrats around, this is the best way we can spend out time and advertising budget?!

Don't misunderstand me. I agree that Bush and his cronies are dangerous and -- through their actions and inactions -- have harmed far more people than the Big T has ever harmed in our country.

But apparently, a good half of the country or so has a huge blindspot and/or a warped sense of relative morality.Bush could be killing little boys and girls in the White House basement and his supporters would either cover up the story or retort that Clinton had S-E-X in the White House, you know!

In other words, we Democrats can highlight Bush's glaring deficiencies until our faces or fingers turn blue, and it's not gonna make a damn bit of difference. Why? Because Bush is so durn likeable, idiotic remarks, asinine policies, obnoxious smirk and all.

Here's a radical idea that seems to have escaped most of our Democratic candidates and those who write ads on their behalf: Death and destruction may sell papers, but people actually do want to hear something positive once in a while. No, really!

So I must ask (admittedly a bit hypocritically after the lead-in on this blog entry): Why are we Democrats so good at being miserable and defiant and pissed off (though justifiably so) and so pathetically lousy at actually mass-articulating a message that's inspiring, uplifting, and positive?

Despite Bush's best efforts, America is a great place and has potential for much more greatness. We have the potential to erase homelessness, to have fabulous schools, to actually take care of our wilderness, and to build a future we can all be proud of.

When will the Democrats wise up and start talking more about creating a positive future instead of ranting about the lousy mess we now find ourselves in?

Ironically (and in stark contrast with sanctimonious twits like Lieberman), I've actually heard The "Angry" Candidate (a.k.a. Howard Dean) speak about how we can move forward and accomplish wonderful goals by working together. But unfortunately all that gets covered is his more controversial comments, including some labeled as gaffes that I don't think are gaffes at all (do YOU really feel safer with some two-bit tyrant in custody halfway around the world?)

---

So apparently, we're now getting the Bushin30seconds "winning" ad shown during the Superbowl. Great. Does anyone actually believe in their heart that this strategy of fearmongering and negativity is going to sway anyone to vote Democratic? "Wow, this ad suggests that Bush has mortgaged our children's future. Well, golly gee, I used to like Bush, but now I don't anymore!"

Then again, I'm one of those obnoxious hyper-rational folks who never understood why people are persuaded by commercials and staged imagery on the whole anyway. But I guess there are enough people who fall for the idea that beer gets you sex, cars are who YOU are, and a guy in a flight suit MUST be decisive and manly.

The problem here is that the anti-Bush ad at issue offers no positive alternatives. There's no contrast between the Bush status quo and the potential for smaller deficits, for instance. Therefore, the message is relegated to the realm of the academic rather than the persuasively emotional. And unless the Democrat marketers wise up and get on some Prozac, any hopes of a Democrat in the White House will be in the realm of Fantasy.

Love this Tag this Share this entry! :) [ What the heck?! ]

Del.icio.us

Digg

Furl

Spurl

Slashdot