Sunday, September 28, 2008
Abstracts for Presidential Campaign Arguments
Your abstracts (based on the model distributed in class on Friday, September 25) are due on or before midnight tonight (Sunday 27/Monday 28). Make sure that your abstract clearly addresses your research question, the subject of your investigation (the campaigns that you're studying), and your argument. The more substantive, clear, and fully explained your argument is in the abstract, the more convincing and fluid your in-class presentation is likely to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Change of Tactics:
The Change in Policy Attacks of Presidential Campaign Commercials
During Presidential Campaigns, or any campaigns at all, there are always times when the opposing candidates start attacking each others policies. They do this to make people think that the opposing candidate is only going to hurt their future. The best way to do this sort of negative campaigning is to make commercials explaining how the opposing party’s policies will hurt the public. These campaign ads used to show all the policies that the opposing candidate has made, which have had a negative effect on the lives of American citizens. As the years have gone by, these ads have switched to telling about the policies the opposing candidate will put into effect if elected that will affect Americans negatively. This causes voters to think more about the future events that might happen, instead of the past events that have already influenced their lives. This plays on the fear of voters, making it more likely that they’ll vote against the opposing candidate. These attacks can be highly effective because of the fear they inspire in voters.
Campaign advertisements have had a negative edge almost since their very beginning in the 1950’s but as time has passed attack ads questioning the opposing candidates’ qualifications and experience have become more and more central to the election. The 2008 election epitomizes the shift of campaign ads and their changing focus on experience. When John Kennedy ran for president he challenged Vice-President Nixon’s qualifications and preparedness to become the next president and that trend has continued into the election campaign of George H. W. Bush. He challenged Dukakis’ experience as Massachusetts governor and insinuated that Dukakis would do the same to the United States that he did to Boston Harbor. John McCain’s long history in both politics and the military has become a large factor in his campaign. He has capitalized on his experience and frequently questioned Obama’s experience. Campaign ads have become more and more ruthless as elections have progressed and one of today’s most important issues is experience.
Title: The Ideal President
Abstract: A presidential candidates' military background becomes a very important issue during his or her campaign. When a candidate's military background is portrayed in commercials, the ads try to incorporate both policy and character into the presidential candidate's stereotype. Dole's life threatening war experience is seen as a character builder that makes him the man he is today. In the 2004 election, John Kerry is displayed as a strong leader because of the personal tails told by his fellow war buddies and how he saved their lives in Vietnam. There is a similar feel of strong character in the campaign ads for John McCain, portraying him as a war hero to ensure voters that he has the ability to be president. By displaying these war veterans as strong, bold and fearless during wartime, it ensures Americans that they can do a terrific job as president. Their strong characteristics enable them to provide strong policies for our country.
Presidential campaign advertisements have been used to communicate the candidates’ policies with the American public. These nominees found that a good way to make the ads appealing and to display their policies was to use children. In 1964, Johnson uses two young girls in the “Daisy Girl” commercial and in the “Ice Cream” commercial in order to appeal to the American families and present his policies at the same time. These commercials seem almost like a scare tactic because they say if you do not want your child to be blown up then vote for Johnson. Four years later in the 1968 election, Nixon uses children in the “Child’s Face” ad to correspond his policies on poverty, welfare, and civil rights. Even in this 2008 election, both candidates use children to tell Americans their policies that will change America for the better. While John McCain and Barack Obama do not make the whole commercial about children, they do disperse children throughout the ads about job losses. It seems that presidential nominees over the years feel confident that the advertisements will evoke certain self-assurance from the American public in the policies if they involve a subject that hits close to home.
The Effectiveness of Experience in Presidential Campaign Commercials
Since the 1950s, presidential candidates have incorporated their experience into television campaign ads in an effect to appeal to the American people. In the 1960 and 1992 presidential elections, the candidates with the most political experience were not elected, even though they tried to use the experience to their advantage. The President of the United States needs to have the knowledge of foreign policy, military, economy, and social issues surrounding the nation. To most voters, experience in these areas is key and illustrates the candidates’ qualities of leadership, problem solving, and dedication. In the television commercials for Kennedy, Nixon, Bush senior, McCain, and Obama, the different kinds of experience of each candidate are revealed. The experience issues mentioned in these advertisements are military, national security, government corruption, and social concerns. Each candidate brings important aspects of their own experience to the challenge of running for president. History shows that some candidates are able to capitalize on less experience in a way that is more effective than other candidates who have greater experience.
Presidential campaigns have utilized what is popular during the time to appeal to the audience and make there candidate look better suited for the job. Throughout history, campaigns have used popular sports, situations, and even well known celebrities to paint an image of the candidate they are portraying. This use of "pop culure" varies from being used to positively portray a party's own candidate or negatively bash the other party's candidate, but they are all similar in that they take advantage of what is popular at the time to create a campaign that is relavent and therefore may be more successful. By using pop culture in campaigns, the candidate can portray his ideas, or scrutinize the others ideas, in a way that is relatable to everyone.
Presidential Television Campaign Advertisements: A Shift from Self-glorifying to Mocking
Since 1952, presidential campaign advertisements have shifted from glorifying the candidate to viciously attacking the opponent. Although negative advertising has been prevalent in campaigning since 1952, the television advertisements have become more accusatory of the opposing candidate’s policies. In contrast to today’s mocking campaigns, the 1952 advertisement for Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower uses a jingle to encourage voters to choose Ike. In the commercial, the only negative reference to the opposition is the statement “We don’t want John or Dean or Harry.” In 1988, Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis used the blatantly negative ad “Hey, pal” that mocked George Bush’s economic policies. This commercial is a perfect example of the shift from more positive advertisements to ones that are mocking and accusatory. Also, Republican John McCain’s 2008 advertisement “Taxman” attacks his opponent Barack Obama’s policies by mocking his celebrity and drawing the conclusion that his popularity is a veil that covers his incapability to lead. Although all presidential campaign advertisements aim to gain voters, the manner in which commercials try to gain these votes has become more dramatically negative since 1952.
Candidates in Presidential elections employ a number of techniques to garner public support and disapproval of their opponent. Among these techniques is the television ad. Today the TV ad is the most influential,there have already been more ads in this unfinished election than in any before. Each ad basically says either- "I'm good, vote for me" or "he's bad, vote for me". Presidential hopefuls have utilized new technologies and presentation techniques to say the same things about themselves and their opponents throughout election history. In 1980 Reagan showed newsreel footage of Iranians and presented a quote from them that ultimately conveyed the message that they were afraid of him. Bush did the same thing against Kerry in 2004, citing that the enemy wanted Kerry elected but were afraid of him. Today McCain is casting himself on the same light. All candidates found different ways to say the exact same thing.
The Use of Peace in Campaign Commercials
Presidential campaign commercials have consistently used the theme of peace to appeal to voters. In the 1960 election, Nixon discusses how we must show "firmness and strength to the Communist world" in order to maintain peace. In 1980, Reagan makes a similar claim in one of his commercials stating "it takes strong leadership to keep the peace, weak leadership will lose it." Both of these candidates argue that to maintain peace, the government and military must be strong. In the current election, this same idea is used but in a different way. Instead of saying that peace is maintained by a strong military (which sounds a little contradictory but makes sense) Barack Obama is saying that we must regain peace by getting out of Iraq and that John McCain will keep us there for "100 years" if we have to. All three of these candidates use the issue of peace to appeal to voters, but Nixon and Reagan use it in a different way than Obama is using it in the current election.
Post a Comment