“Gotcha” Politics for Obama and Romney in Presidential Campaign Videos

The federal government is swimming in debt, the national unemployment rate is over 8 percent, and the housing market remains anemic with only glimmers of activity. And, what is absorbing more media ink in this presidential race than a ten pound sponge? It’s the tale of the candidate videos.

First, it was the 2012 Florida fundraiser video of Mitt Romney disdainfully describing the 47% of Americans who live to mooch off Uncle Sam and pay no income taxes Then, it was the 1998 recording of then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama arguing for a redistribution of wealth in America. That was followed by the 1985 Bain Capital video of Mitt Romney espousing his company’s aim to “invest in startup companies and ongoing companies” and “harvest them at a significant profit” for his investors as opposed to creating jobs. Not to be outdone, allies of the Romney campaign responded with an attack this week on President Obama for “racially charged rhetoric” based upon comments he made in a 2007 videotape at Hampton University in Virginia admonishing the Bush Administration for failing to take action to “quiet riot” among blacks in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. What will be next – retrieving footage of Obama and Romney “sneezing the wrong way” in the second grade, a longstanding common joke in candidate campaign circles? What really matters: a slip up by a candidate or a harsh interpretation of their statements – some made as long as 27 years ago – or their stated policies for America during the next four years and their ability to lead the country to get the job done and elevate us from this economic recession? My response would be the latter.

Let me first admit that sometimes an unscripted statement made by a candidate can inadvertently reveal their true character or beliefs. Romney’s statement about the 47% (really 46%) of Americans who pay no federal income taxes conveyed a lack of sympathy and understanding for the plight of many Americans – be they elderly, poor, disabled, or young, most of whom deservedly benefit from government programs and some of whom pay payroll, sales, or municipal taxes. And, Romney made his gaffe worse by apologizing for his “inelegant” remarks a few days later. Now, who but a rather elitist person uses the word “inelegant” to describe his remarks? And, Obama’s 1998 statement suggesting that government must become more effective and efficient in delivering services “to facilitate some redistribution”. . . . . . . . “to make sure everybody’s got a shot” seems a fair reflection of his belief in advocating for people in the lower and middle classes of America and might be seen as threatening to some wealthy Americans. But, shouldn’t this “gotcha” politics take a back seat to the real issues of this presidential campaign – how will Obama and Romney lead this country forward during the next four years??

I have run for office in nine primaries or elections for federal, state, and municipal office, winning six times. When I was running for Congress in 1987, just days before the special election, one of the major newspapers in the District published a story – then picked up by other papers – claiming that I had said something derogatory about the recently deceased former Congressman in a local debate. They refused to give my campaign a copy of the tape recording until after the election. When we did receive it, we discovered that it was largely inaudible with nothing to substantiate the newspaper’s story and from what we could hear, it seemed consistent with the innocuous statement I believed I had made at the debate. But, it was too late, and I had already lost the election.

Because of similar experiences by other candidates and the more common penchant in recent years for a candidate’s campaign to “go on the attack” against an opponent, most campaign operations today have their own video trackers on staff – to record their own candidate’s speeches and to catch gaffes by their opponent. With today’s interest in “tabloid-like” stories, maybe these video stories “sell better” and have an audience with an appetite for a candidate’s mistakes, “ancient history,” or words taken out of context or misconstrued. After all, polls demonstrate that negative TV ads and media stories – be they true or not – are persuasive to voters. But, isn’t it time to focus on what really matters – how to address our country’s stagnant economy, burgeoning federal debt, and continuing housing crisis? Let’s hope that happens as the presidential debates get underway.