Campaign E-Mails

[Bartholomew]

It is so tempting to create a thread named "Separating Wheat From Chaff, Gods from Men: Ron Paul," just to see the reactions. Alas, I cannot endure such shame. Ignore this. I'm derailing my own thread.

I'm just curious: am I the only one who signs up for pretty much every candidate's campaign e-mails?

If not--has anyone else noticed that these letter all have a lot in common? The voice of the letter is always nearly identical, no matter who is sending it. It seems like even the candidates that agree with Bush want to put out the idea that Old = Bad and New = Good. (I'm talking about phrases like "Time for change" and other such meaningless hyperbole.)

I get the feeling a lot of these campaigns would benefit enormously if they'd come to P&CE and hire a bunch of us to write their letters. Seriously-- a BillyThrilly campaign letter. A Haskins campaign letter (not that I can actually see him doing that.) Bbird. BoP. Rob. The unique voices and solid opinions that make this forum fun would enhance the quality of campaign emails immensely, and then it wouldn't sound like they'd all hired the same guy to write their stuff.

[William Haskins]

i get em. my favorites are the folksy ones from the edwards campaign.

[Bartholomew]

Rudy's make me laugh. I especially liked the "Terrorists' war on us" spiel, way, way back when his website went up.

[kristie911]

I haven't gotten any campaign e-mails but I had to comment on the beginning of your post, Bart, because it seriously made me LOL! :roll:

[robeiae]

What is "e-mail"?

[InfinityGoddess]

I've gotten emails from Chris Dodd and Hillary Clinton. And mostly because I somehow managed to get on their email lists whenever I signed a petition supporting them in any good thing they're supporting.

Haven't signed on to Edwards or Obama, but then I get so much stuff from pro-choice groups, environmental groups, conservation groups, and Free Press as it is...

[benbradley]

It is so tempting to create a thread named "Separating Wheat From Chaff, Gods from Men: Ron Paul," just to see the reactions. Alas, I cannot endure such shame. Ignore this. I'm derailing my own thread.

I'm just curious: am I the only one who signs up for pretty much every candidate's campaign e-mails?

If not--has anyone else noticed that these letter all have a lot in common? The voice of the letter is always nearly identical, no matter who is sending it. It seems like even the candidates that agree with Bush want to put out the idea that Old = Bad and New = Good. (I'm talking about phrases like "Time for change" and other such meaningless hyperbole.)
...
Well, what else would they say? "Time for the same-old same-old" doesn't come off very well.

And especially not this year, more particularly to the current political situation - it seems that since neither the President nor the Vice President is running for anything, things WILL change, and the current administration DOES have quite low ratings, so even Republicans would want to distance themselves from it.

Glad to see you saying you SIGNED UP for these emails as opposed to just getting them, as there would be little to stop political spam, much as political telemarketing is exempt from the federal "do not call" telephone list. I registered as a Republican (okay, there, I said it) for the 2006 election, and I must have got 20 or more voice mail messages from candidates, including one from Newt Gingrich saying how important it was for Republicans to go vote. No doubt if I had registered as a Democrat the Democratic candidates would have called me, with perhaps even a call from Bill Clinton.

[Bartholomew]

Well, what else would they say? "Time for the same-old same-old" doesn't come off very well.


Don't we, as writers, always talk about the importance of avoiding cliché? Every single candidate seems to have some variation of the slogan "Time for change." It's tired and old and it wants to go to bed. How about, "As president, I will end 'The War on Stuff.' I will not war against poverty-- I will feed people. I will not war against terrorists-- I will make our cities secure so that our children will not live in fear." I mean, it's ALL hyperbole. Why not be, even a little, creative?

[whistlelock]

So, get involved in your local politics and build a reputation as a writer OR get hired by a PR firm that does the speach writing for a National candidate.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Every single candidate seems to have some variation of the slogan "Time for change."

Change. It's so vague. And there's nothing to imply the change is for the good. It's just change.

Why not "improve," or "fix," or "repair," or even better action verbs, "transform," or "revolutionize!"

Change is one of those meaningless buzzwords that surprisingly, every supporter grabs onto and shouts like a mantra. Change. Change. Change.

But to answer your initial question, no I have no campaign emails whatsoever. I already have an inbox full of junk mail. Why would I invite more?

[benbradley]

Change. It's so vague. And there's nothing to imply the change is for the good. It's just change.

Why not "improve," or "fix," or "repair," or even better action verbs, "transform," or "revolutionize!"

Change is one of those meaningless buzzwords that surprisingly, every supporter grabs onto and shouts like a mantra. Change. Change. Change.
"The system is broken and cannot be fixed. It must be replaced. As an outsider, I can do this..." bla bla bla.

I smell a story challenge here. Perhaps of two politicians running for mayor of Mayberry, or maybe mayor of Metropolis.

But to answer your initial question, no I have no campaign emails whatsoever. I already have an inbox full of junk mail. Why would I invite more?[/quote]
If it were INVITED it wouldn't be spam, but that's just nitpicking on definitions...

That's the scary potential of political spam, as if an estimated 90 percent of current email being unsolicited isn't already close enough to destroy email as a one-to-one communication medium. I can imagine politicians requiring ISP's by law to deliver political spam, when they already filter out huge amounts of commercial spam, which will then start including political keywords to try to break through the filters.

[Shadow_Ferret]

But the system isn't broken, and even if it was, how can one person, even the President, change that?

But then I'm cynical, to me, republicans and democrats, conservatives and liberals, are just opposite sides of the same coin.

[Robert Toy]

But the system isn't broken, and even if it was, how can one person, even the President, change that?

But then I'm cynical, to me, republicans and democrats, conservatives and liberals, are just opposite sides of the same coin.

That is an excellent point. The president is but one of three branches of the government. He can talk about change all day long but until he convinces the House, nothing will change.

[benbradley]

Don't we, as writers, always talk about the importance of avoiding cliché? Every single candidate seems to have some variation of the slogan "Time for change." It's tired and old and it wants to go to bed. How about, "As president, I will end 'The War on Stuff.' I will not war against poverty-- I will feed people. I will not war against terrorists-- I will make our cities secure so that our children will not live in fear." I mean, it's ALL hyperbole. Why not be, even a little, creative?
Okay, I give up, you're absolutely right... just as (as this CNN video report says) "subprime" was the word for 2007, "change" is the word (at least so far) for the 2008 Presidential Election:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2008/01/07/moos.change.change.change.cnn

But the system isn't broken, and even if it was, how can one person, even the President, change that?

But then I'm cynical, to me, republicans and democrats, conservatives and liberals, are just opposite sides of the same coin.
You think YOU'RE cynical, I didn't mean to imply that any of these candidate would actually try to do what they say, they're just saying these things this "change" thing to get elected.