Slashdot Mirror
McCain Campaign Offers Rewards For Turn-Key Comments
According to a story at the Washington Post, John McCain's presidential campaign is offering more than moral suasion to fire people up for a McCain presidency; they're also offering ready-made snippets of rhetoric for interested supporters to supply under their own names in public comments to online news sources and forums. Such pre-written commentary by itself is neither new nor necessarily nefarious, but it seems a bit off-kilter that prolific commenters are eligible for rewards — not just campaign swag like hats and stickers, but higher-ticket items like a ride with McCain on his campaign bus. Probably a script could be whipped up to compare the canned suggestions on the site with "grassroots" comments on political news sites around the web.
As per the subject line, this is going to end badly.
I do, however, find it interesting that this astroturfing is being done so publicly. Before the sources were always hidden, as if the originators seemed ashamed of it.
Now they're acting as if it seems to be business as usual.
Are party supporters allowed to have their own opinion these days? Anecodatal evidence suggests that there is a hive mind forming.
The reason for them doing this is because Democratic supporters tend to be a lot more vocal about their support compared to Republican supporters. This may be anecdotal, but for the sites I view, I see way more Obama supporters spouting out campaign rhetoric compared to McCain supporters. At the same time, all the national polls I see have the two in a virtual dead heat. Why are we seeing more people screaming their support for Obama? The RNC has noticed this, and is trying to light a fire under the Republican supporters in order to get them screaming just as loudly for McCain.
It's probably about the demographic. Republicans tend to be older, quiet, "don't rock the boat" types who don't give a shit about anything that doesn't concern them. Democrats tend to be young, vocal, "Change NOW!" types who feel that society as a whole needs to better function. It makes sense.
I am so sick of "talking points." It just reeks of brand advertising.
Modern politics is all about brand advertising. Nobody really wants a serious discussion of the issues, least of all the candidates. You tell your base what they want to hear, you demonize your opponent in hopes of demoralizing his base, and you get your people to drive your supporters to the polls while trying to disenfranchise your opponent's supporters. If all else fails, you throw some ballot boxes into a river.
The whole idea is doing whatever is necessary to get more people to vote for you than for the other guy. Glitzy advertising that paints you as a hero of the working man and your opponent as a clown (or demon) who will single-handedly destroy the country is a key part of the package. Serious discourse has no place in such an environment.
On top of that, now you have the Internet to deal with. In this case, the more parrots you have mindlessly regurgitating your talking points on blogs and various forums, the better. It's like the hot chicks at the bar that invite you to hang out with them and offer you some expensive name brand liquor. It's viral advertising, and if it can be used to sell booze, why can't it be used to sell candidates?
Sure, the whole thing is sleazy, but that's politics for you.
I take it you aren't familiar with the history of our Presidential elections. If you were, you'd realize that while it's sad we are still stuck in the same muck raking environment that John Adams and Thomas Jefferson slandered each other under, it's obviously nothing new.
Most Americans are better off than they were 50 years ago. Just most Americans have forgotten how to be frugal and now impulse buy all kinds of crap on credit cards then wonder why they're screwed when the credit card bills roll in.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
If you think Obama's a socialist, you don't know the meaning of the word socialist.
I am dismayed at the overwhelming liberalism present on this site. I had hoped that fellow geeks would have more sense than this. Conservatism, capitalism...that is what our country was founded on. McCain is not the poster child for the conservative movement by any means, but he is far superior to the socialist ideas put forth by Obama and fellow liberals, such as Nancy Pelosi. Please, PLEASE, take some time to understand the issues prior to repeating the nonsense so abundant in our media.
The reason this site is 'overwhelmingly liberal' is that /. has a global audience. Not just Alabama. It's easy to be a liberal when you're compared with, say, FOX, or the Republican Party. Hell, even the Democrats are pretty damned conservative on some things, particularly the red-state ones. This is roughly the same line of reasoning involved in creating Conservapedia - this thing is more liberal than me, therefore it must be horribly biased, and I must create my own with a correct view!
When you hear people talk about the 'far left' attacking Obama for being too conservative, consider that a large number of people (many not in America) consider your politics to be less about 'liberal vs. conservative' and more 'conservative vs. extremist'. You have mainstream politicians who haven't the slightest concern for the rights of women or gays, and in America a smear campaign involves calling the other guy a Muslim. That should be right up there with saying he's a Jew or a Catholic, but in America it's still just fine.
Everybody's a centrist in their own mind (or alternatively, thinks that there's a 'right' and a 'wrong' side of the center.) If 90% of the people you see are more liberal than you, then congratulations, you're atypically conservative.