Using Technology to Deepen Democracy, Using Democracy to Ensure Technology Benefits Us All

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Romney's Ugly "America the Beautiful" May Be the Soundtrack of the Next Three Months

Although many folks remember the Willie Horton ad from the 1988 Presidential campaign for what it presaged of the mass-mediated Movement Republican demagoguery to come, I remember best myself the lethal effectiveness of Pappy Bush's "I Remember You" ad (which I can't find on YouTube, else I'd post it, too) which unfairly assimilated Dukakis to an unfairly maligned Carter to frame a compelling narrative of choice in which the images and slogans and soundtrack complemented one another at multiple levels, rewriting history in a satisfyingly simplistic way, weirdly packing the punch of a negative ad while seeming to be a positive one, provoking fear, inspiring warmth, and even zinging with good humor. It was a bravura ad in a year of awful ones (needless to say, I voted for Dukakis anyway).

More brutally negative in a time when unquestionable advantages follow from an early an insistent negative definition of opponents, especially when they are having trouble positively defining themselves, this political ad from the Obama campaign, the latest in a long and possibly endless series of ads attacking Romney's ruthless record of outsourcing at Bain and secretive tax avoidance schemes, like 1988's "I Remember You" may be one for the history books, and for many of the same reasons.



The ad, called "Firms," indeed firms up a host of Obama campaign narratives -- many of them wisely pushed by the Obama campaign against the highly vocal advice of out of touch Beltway pols and pundits too cozy themselves with Big Finance -- emphasizing Romney's ties to finance capital and the ties of finance capital, in turn, to the economic crisis in which so many people who have to work for a living (unlike Romney) are suffering, thus wedding the Obama administration to economic populist themes redolent of Occupy while at once attacking Romney's supposed key strength, his "competence" as a "businessman," and culminating in the slogan, "Mitt Romney's Not the Solution, He's the Problem." It seems to me that, like "I Remember You," this ad condenses a number of complexities into a satisfyingly simple narrative that propels us into a choice that seems curiously positive for all the ad's apparent negativity (an inversion of the tonal doubling in "I Remember You," but yielding much the same punch). And, again, it is most of all the mining of a rich vein of subversive humor through the musical accompaniment to the texts and images flashing fleetly by that enables this bit of propulsive discursive magic.

For even though Romney's robotically relentless and creepily secretive corporate predation is ruthlessly highlighted yet again in this devastating ad, can anybody doubt that the devastation this time is almost entirely an effect of the soundtrack provided by Romney's soulless tuneless singing of "America the Beautiful" throughout?

Is it possible for Presidential gravitas to survive intact the inevitable recoil of embarrassment one feels upon hearing Romney's painful performance? Is it possible to discern the secular multiracial multicultural reality that constitutes today's "America the Beautiful" in the so sad stiff straight staid square superannuated white-bread ugliness of Romney's reactionary rendition?

And, oh yes, it probably doesn't hurt that some may be reminded in witnessing Romney's sorry sing-a-long that the President, too, has occasionally had a song to sing...

3 comments:

jimf said...

> Is it possible for Presidential gravitas to survive intact the inevitable
> recoil of embarrassment one feels upon hearing Romney's painful performance?

Well, you and I are not the target audience for that performance.

Just as Romney's audience is certainly not the kind that would have
approved of Bill Clinton in shades playing the saxophone on TV in '92.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTkUeb6zQFA

Dale Carrico said...

I find it very hard to believe that Romney's serenade was gamed out and tested in advance and found a winner by the suave Suits like Clinton's so obviously was. That sax solo, remember, was the centerpiece of a demonstrably effective charm offensive that brought Clinton from negative polling numbers only Romney himself has equaled, and indeed magnified, in modern Presidential campaigning history, and turned those negatives in no time flat to ringing positives.

I think Romney is an utterly insulated super-rich guy who doesn't have a clue how he comes off in everyday situations, I think he is surrounded by handlers in utter despair at their client's terminal tone-deafness (in the many senses that apply). The Obama campaign is making Romney a thoroughly ridiculous and alienating figure and it is probably already too late to undo the damage. And I think this is about a scorched earth campaign to generate enough downticket coattails to retain the Senate and possibly regain the House (at any rate to change the mix), which Obama needs to enable his mandate to translate into policy against unprecedented irresponsible Republican obstructionism.

I will admit that I have had moments of worrying a teeny tiny bit about Nixonian politics of resentment being activated by the particular form negative ads about Romney are taking -- but I just don't see it happening at all, I see Romney flailing and revealing ramifying vulnerabilities, and in any case we are no longer in the demographic reality that enabled Nixon to peddle the lie of a Silent Majority and mobilize the racist Southern Strategy that is now turning the GOP's ugly winning streak into suicidal self-marginalization as a party capable of national governance.

jimf said...

> I think Romney is an utterly insulated super-rich guy who doesn't
> have a clue how he comes off in everyday situations, I think he is
> surrounded by handlers in utter despair at their client's terminal
> tone-deafness (in the many senses that apply).

You've almost gotta feel sorry for the GOP at this point (at least
in re the next presidential election). Romney is the least of multiple
evils for them -- the only one out of that whole peanut gallery
(Bachmann, Gingrich, and -- oh my God, Santorum) with any claim
at all to presidential credibility.

It would have been entertaining to see how the handlers would have
handled those other loose cannons.

Where oh where is the next Ronald Reagan? (And is
Hillary going to be the 2016 Democratic nominee?)

I take as a given, of course, that Obama will be reelected this
year (though I have no idea what's going to happen with Congress).
I had a discussion with a friend over the holiday about that --
I said as much about Obama, and he said "Oh, I don't know
about that! Those poll figures are pretty close!"

I just read a chapter in David Brin's _Existence_ that has a
(real! genuine!) fortune-telling octopus in it. (There's also
a fortune-telling parrot, but apparently the octopus has
a better track record.)

Forget the pollsters -- I think what we need to predict the outcome
of presidential elections is a fortune-telling octopus.
Maybe P. Z. Myers can tell us how to get one.