On the car ride in I heard an add on the radio for
American Dreamz (a satiric look at the American Idol phenomenon.) Which of course led to a fanciful "what if" scenario of putting the Democratic 2008 Primary hopefuls on a series of reality shows. Good idea? or Bad Idea? An internal monologue that I hope will turn into a dialogue spills into the extended body...
PS. (just because my other Diary was also prompted from a radio add doesn't mean I'm establishing a pattern here... I promise!)
A fanciful
"what if" scenario of putting the Democratic 2008 Primary hopefuls on a series of reality shows. (the genesis of which came from realizing that more people vote for American Idol then for the President of the United States.
Good idea? or Bad Idea?
I am aware that this is a little early for discourse since we haven't seen the results of the 2006 mid-terms, but this isn't actually about the candidates and is more about the process.
Ever it is the question- the debate. "The problem is X didn't capture our hearts and minds, if only X was more charismatic..." vs "It doesn't matter if Y is so personable, Y doesn't have any actual policy (that I agree with) and just floats in the wind of public opinion."
More Charisma! vs. The message is key!
A commonly stated problem is:
None of the possible 2008 Primary contenders have enough national name recognition...
and people don't go out and vote (but they will pick up the phone and dial a number, or text a number on the cell phone or freep a poll- which leads to another topic of "How to make voting easier" but that's another discussion for another time)
But does making an ass of yourself William Hung style get you much purchase in the political arena? Do you just become a joke? Does the cost of recognition hurt or hinder you? Would Americans feel closer to a Presidential candidate who 'survived' the physical challenges and the "vote off the island" of Survivor? Would Americans feel closer to a Presidential candidate who out-sang, out-danced, or out-answered other candidates? (Forget a debate, Straight-up Weakest Link time!)
Is there too great a cost? Do you lose the grist of greatness by trying to appeal to the masses? Would people be turned away if their heroes did the reality TV thing?
Would statements like
If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there is a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for their prescription drugs, and having to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandparent. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties.
1
(this being the perfect union of charisma and message by the way)
be any less or more poignant if it was equated to a guy who jumped from car to car over a 30 story fall in fear-factor?
Or would this turn into NBC's follies at trying to humanize the Olympics where people just said "SHUT UP ALREADY"?
Would people watch it?
Would candidates do it?
Would it be productive?
Would it be a travesty of the democratic process?
Charismatic appeal and name recognition? or policy and message?
1.Barack Obama: 2004 Democratic National Convention Keynote Address