Jumping the Shark (in political terms)
To understand this post, first you should know what the term "jump the shark" means. It was coined a few years back in reference to a particular episode of the show "Happy Days" in which the Fonz (played by Henry Winkler) jumped over a shark while waterskiing. It is said to be the point when the show writers had written a plot so desperate and lame that regular viewers realized that the show had passed its apex and began a spiralling free fall to its eventual demise. In a political context, I believed today is the day that the 2008 election "jumped the shark".
The candidates for the most part have kept the discourse civil; with short, strategic jabs being taken to help shore up the base for the few important primaries that remain. McCain has the de facto Republican nomination and with the talk of near parity between the Democratic candidates in Texas and Ohio, Obama seems headed for insurmountable delegate lead. Thus the two front runners seem to be transitioning their tactics towards the general election and thats where the tricks get dirty.
Just as John Kerry was "swift boated" in the 2004 elections, John McCain was likewise "swift boated" in the 2000 elections by his own party. Using a shameful mix of questioning McCain's war record, his wife's brief drug addiction to using the oft reviled "southern strategy" to stoke fear among southern white voters that his adopted Bangladeshi daughter was instead a black child he fathered out of wedlock. McCain is no stranger to these types of attacks.
It really came as no surprise today when various news organizations reported that McCain could have possibly had an inappropriate relationship with a lobbyist in 2000. Thus the shark has been jumped. We are no longer in the stage where civil discourse about politics will be issue based and meaningful (or at least any remaining semblence thereof). Coverage about the candidates will continue to devolve into personal attacks and these attacks will likely trump the issues in the 2008 election, just as they did in 2000 and 2004. The candidates know that voters are largely uninformed about policy, and public opinion of a candidate's character is an important part of winning the general election. Smear campaigns work by seeding doubt into otherwise rational voters. (Perhaps this was why Johnnie Cochran was such an effective lawyer; he made absurd arguments seem rational. Maybe O.J. will help the authorities find the "real killer", ya know?)
Whether the McCain lobbyist story will pan out remains to be seen. Whats sure to be seen is more deviation from the issues in the name of petty partisan politics. Whether it be the revelations of long since forgotten pseudo-affairs, accusations of speech plagiarism or a perhaps an intentional collusion of a candidate with a well known international terrorist by the media, we have yet to hit rock bottom . Make no mistake, we have long since jumped the shark.
The candidates for the most part have kept the discourse civil; with short, strategic jabs being taken to help shore up the base for the few important primaries that remain. McCain has the de facto Republican nomination and with the talk of near parity between the Democratic candidates in Texas and Ohio, Obama seems headed for insurmountable delegate lead. Thus the two front runners seem to be transitioning their tactics towards the general election and thats where the tricks get dirty.
Just as John Kerry was "swift boated" in the 2004 elections, John McCain was likewise "swift boated" in the 2000 elections by his own party. Using a shameful mix of questioning McCain's war record, his wife's brief drug addiction to using the oft reviled "southern strategy" to stoke fear among southern white voters that his adopted Bangladeshi daughter was instead a black child he fathered out of wedlock. McCain is no stranger to these types of attacks.
It really came as no surprise today when various news organizations reported that McCain could have possibly had an inappropriate relationship with a lobbyist in 2000. Thus the shark has been jumped. We are no longer in the stage where civil discourse about politics will be issue based and meaningful (or at least any remaining semblence thereof). Coverage about the candidates will continue to devolve into personal attacks and these attacks will likely trump the issues in the 2008 election, just as they did in 2000 and 2004. The candidates know that voters are largely uninformed about policy, and public opinion of a candidate's character is an important part of winning the general election. Smear campaigns work by seeding doubt into otherwise rational voters. (Perhaps this was why Johnnie Cochran was such an effective lawyer; he made absurd arguments seem rational. Maybe O.J. will help the authorities find the "real killer", ya know?)
Whether the McCain lobbyist story will pan out remains to be seen. Whats sure to be seen is more deviation from the issues in the name of petty partisan politics. Whether it be the revelations of long since forgotten pseudo-affairs, accusations of speech plagiarism or a perhaps an intentional collusion of a candidate with a well known international terrorist by the media, we have yet to hit rock bottom . Make no mistake, we have long since jumped the shark.