The Nastiest US Presidential Campaign

Dr. Yuk-Ching Hon

17 February 2012

Well, the US presidential election is always more lively and dramatic than our tame British national election.

From what I read from the latest issue of the New Yorker, this year’s US presidential campaign is probably the nastiest ever as it is all about the clout of the super PACs (political-action committees) and negative advertisements. Romney is ahead mainly because he is supported by a new super PAC called Restore Our Future and a killer ad team led by Larry McCarthy who is excellent at putting together negative advertisement.

In 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled that corporations, unions and wealthy individuals could spend without limit and pool their money into PACs to influence elections, as long as they didn’t fund candidates directly. Super PACs have already amassed a great fortune into the 2012 race, most of it going to negative advertising. Restore Our future has spent 17 million dollars – more than any other PAC – and $15 million of which has gone to producing and airing ads made by Larry McCarthy. Romney’s own official campaign so far has spent only $11 million on ads. Restore Our Future has in practice become Romney’s head warrior.

These negative ads are extremely successful in turning black into white and white into black. In fact, Newt Gingrich’s lead in the race was crushed by a series of these negative ads produced by Larry McCarthy and sponsored by Restore Our Future. The theme of the ads was Gingrich’s “baggage”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjD_IFclRro In this video, the audience saw a visual gag of battered suitcases, plastered with Gingrich bumper stickers, tumbling down an airport luggage carrousel. One by one, the bags busted open. A green suitcase exploded with loose dollar notes – apparently ill-gotten money from his work as a consultant to Freddie Mac. Another disgorged a video of Gingrich looking very friendly with Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat who is a conservatives’ hate figure. The video listed so many transgressions by Gingrich that the ad indirectly hinted at Gingrich’s possible disqualification. The ad ended with a powerful attack line:”Newt Gingrich – too much baggage!” However, not all the accusations in the video were true.

The 2010 rule has disastrous results for fair democratic elections. The influence of PACs in the US political process has now become a plague; wealthy individuals, corporations and unions are now able to sway the elections of federal, state and local officials. Candidates with the most money will likely be the winners in political campaigns, not necessary the most qualified! Restore Our Future raised more than $30 million in 2011 from gigantic wealthy donors such as Jesse Rogers, a Palo Alto investment fund manager and his wife, Melinda; and Edward Conard, a former executive at Bain Capital. This figure however was dwarfed by the combined coffers of two Republican Super PACs – American Crossroads and Crossroad GPS, they have amassed a war-chest of $51million to fight Obama’s re-election bid. In comparison, the major Democratic Super PACs managed to raise only a meagre $19million. This imbalance has now pushed Obama to make a U-turn. His campaign team has now indicated that they would encourage wealthy fundraisers to gift large sums to outside groups supporting the White House incumbent.

So, you see, it is no longer simply a battle between the Liberals and the Conservatives but really war between incredibly rich people supporting individual candidates; it doesn't matter whether they are presidential materials or not, what matters it’s their malleability.