And in Pennsylvania, a local Fox affiliate running arguably the most shocking ad yet, from the outer reaches of Islamophobia — one that mashes images of bloodied corpses, decapitations and chants of “Allahu akbar” to the tag line, “A vote for Obama helps Muslims murder Christians and Jews.”
Welcome to the final weekend of the most expensive election ever, where the phenomenon of limitless campaign contributions has come to a final push to move the needle.
Everyone knew this was coming, ever since a 2010 Supreme Court ruling determined corporations, unions and third-party interest groups are “people” — people entitled to spend as they wish to express their political views.
But now, as the final surge of so-called “dark money” cascades into the waning days of the campaign, Americans are about to find out just what this ocean of cash — more than $800 million in total advertising — can buy.
Team Obama has been every bit as aggressive in its advertising, famously spending all summer long on a “grand bet” to define Mitt Romney as an unfeeling, uncaring, outsourcing plutocrat.
But the impact of that earlier onslaught, and the Romney campaign’s decision to keep plenty of powder dry for a final bombardment, now has political tongues wagging.
“Rapid decay” — the sheer speed with which the impact of political advertising wears off, like a dose of medicine — “makes the Romney campaign’s strategy of waiting and spending a lot of money now seem sensible,” George Washington University political scientist John Sides wrote Thursday.
But the needle only moves significantly when one side decisively outspends the other, Sides wrote.
And despite reports that pro-Romney groups — including the American Crossroads colossus operated by George W. Bush-era rainmaker Karl Rove — will outspend Obama by 2-1 in the final days, the cash advantage has yet to materialize, he said.
Others, like Michigan State University advertising expert Richard Cole, doubt the final volleys amount to anything more than a waste of money. Coming amid a din of other developments, from high-profile endorsements like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s tilt to Obama to the campaign appearances themselves, the ads are as likely as not to be tuned out, he said.
“We’ve reached the point now where people’s minds are pretty much made up and whoever is left, you have to conclude, is pretty much mindless,” Cole told the Toronto Star. “Once the decision takes hold, more and more people just put their hands over their ears and shout, ‘I don’t want to hear about it’ over the ads.
“But that doesn’t mean we’re proud of how the lid has been taken off, with limitless spending,” he added. “It’s not as if the system was pure before the Supreme Court ruling. But I think we’re alone now among the world’s 175 democracies in tolerating this much influence from non-democratic sources.
“Frankly, I’m embarrassed, knowing that the people of Canada and elsewhere must be scratching their heads at how we’ve allowed money to take hold.”
The dark money doesn’t restrict itself to the top of the ticket. Take, for example, Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin of Missouri, whose remarks about “legitimate rape” rarely causing pregnancy sparked a national outcry in August. Akin enters the home stretch with an ad-blitz bankroll estimated at $1.5 million.
Just over half of that sum comes from the Now or Never Super PAC, a third-party surrogate that is urging voters to overlook Akin’s shortcomings in order to secure Republican control of the Senate. “You don’t have to agree with everything he says, but in the Senate you can be sure Akin will vote for Romney’s policies,” their new ad says.
And some of the biggest bankrolls are aimed not at candidates at all, but rather, state-level ballot initiatives such as California’s Proposition 37, which would require mandatory labelling of genetically modified foods. The advertising war chest working to kill that initiative is now estimated at $41 million, with contributions from a cluster of corporations including Monsanto, Dupont and Dow.
Nearer to home, Michigan’s airwaves are percolating with Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Moroun’s $31-million campaign for Proposal 6 — an initiative that, if approved, would effectively scuttle Ottawa’s plans for a new bridge between Windsor and Detroit, thereby preserving Moroun’s de facto chokehold on an estimated quarter of all truck trade between the two countries.
“Moroun is spending $31 million — it might end up being more than that — basically to protect his own wallet. But from an advertising point of view, he may have gone overboard,” said Cole, noting that Moroun’s ad splurges might make him look like a high roller who doesn’t need public support.
“I’m not ready to call it,” Cole said. “We’ll find out Tuesday.”
Original Article
Source: the star
Author: Mitch Potter
No comments:
Post a Comment