Lack of voters speaks volumes about campaigns
By:The Packet Group
Primary campaigns have always had a certain through-the-looking-glass quality about them. Candidates say yes to one audience, no to another, maybe to a third. Pollsters tell reporters their numbers are up one day, down the next. Allies become enemies. Friends turn into foes.
Curiouser still is the spectacle of members of the same political party treating one another with barely concealed contempt. They burn up the fax machines with reams of angry accusations, hire private investigators to look into their opponents’ private lives, air venomous TV commercials and trade insults that are more appropriate to combatants in a WWF wrestling match than competitors for public office.
Then, the moment the votes are counted, the looking glass is turned upside down. The candidates are now soulmates in a mutual admiration society, effusive in their praise for the dedication, wisdom and sincerity of their erstwhile rival. It’s as if they suddenly sat down to tea with the Mad Hatter.
It would be easy to dismiss all this posturing as theater. All the characters play a carefully scripted role in the primary, reciting their well-rehearsed lines from opening night until the final curtain. Then, at the cast party, they celebrate the end of the run, kiss and make up and go about their lives as if nothing has happened.
But something has happened. The audience that witnessed this rancorous performance will not soon forget the angry allegations, the cacophony of charges and countercharges, the excessive nastiness that marked the primary campaign. And, in increasing numbers, they react to what they have seen by sitting on their hands. Not only do they withhold their applause in June; in growing numbers, they refrain from pulling the lever in the voting booth in November.
A couple of examples from the just-concluded primary election in New Jersey offer little hope that this type of conduct will soon change.
On the Democratic side, Jon Corzine spent the combined gross national product of several Third World countries trying to drive a stake through the political heart of Jim Florio, scorching the former governor (whose scowling visage managed to appear prominently in Mr. Corzine’s attack ads) for pushing through his unpopular $2.8-billion tax package back in 1990. (Interestingly, some of Mr. Corzine’s most prominent supporters were in the Legislature in 1990, voted with enthusiasm for Mr. Florio’s tax package and have blamed him ever since for the angry backlash — but that’s another story.)
Not to be outdone, a group calling itself Citizens for Tax Reform muddied up the Republican primary in the 12th Congressional District, attacking former Rep. Michael Pappas for his affiliation with the Pillar of Fire International Christian Church. It seems that Pillar of Fire was founded by Alma White, who, according to Citizens for Tax Reform, was “a known KKK sympathizer.” (Interestingly, the letterhead of Citizens for Tax Reform contains the names of a couple of former activists in Hands Across New Jersey, the group that fomented the uprising against Jim Florio and those Democratic legislators back in 1990 — but that’s another story.)
Whether the source is the candidates themselves or independent groups acting on behalf of — or against — particular candidates, the effect of all this negative campaigning is the same. It turns voters off. Regrettably, this appears to be of no concern to the candidates and groups who are responsible for the mudslinging. Their objective is not to promote citizenship; it is to win elections. As one campaign consultant put it, “When you’re in the middle of a horserace, the last thing you care about is improving the breed.”
Alas, the breed of campaigning today comes straight out of Wonderland, a blend of the most bizarre characteristics of the Caterpillar, the Mock Turtle and the White Rabbit. Does it work? Go ask Jim Florio and Michael Pappas. Is it ever likely to change? Go ask Alice.