Campaign Ad Rules

Election Day is upon us at last. Come tomorrow, the airwaves will be blessedly free of campaign ads. This year, those campaign ads followed a format as strict as that for a haiku.

They began with a most unflattering photo of one's opponent usually with his/her hair disheveled and mouth open. The campaign ad then tied that opponent, however illogically, to the current economic misery. "When he served as dogcatcher for the Borough of Macungie, Candidate X implemented policies that led to the mortgage crisis. He is Wall Street's candidate, not ours!"

The next photo is of good old Candidate Y, perfectly coiffed and corporate casual, surrounded by his adoring family and an ethnically diverse group of supporters. Candidate Y gets extra points for adorable children and/or ethnically diverse pets. He loses points for mistresses and/or attractive lobbyists of the opposite gender.

Two words appeared in every single campaign ad - "Fight" and "Jobs". Candidate Y will fight for jobs for you! One would think that Harrisburg and Washington are a canvas surrounded by ropes and governed by the Marquis of Queensbury rules and that employers will come begging to your door for you to join them as soon as Candidate Y is in office. Not to be cynical, but if past history holds, Candidate Y is mostly fighting for his job and if he gets it, lobbyists will be coming to his door for a return on their investment.

If the candidates were truly "fighting" for "jobs" would the public have been better served if the billions spent on campaign ads had been invested in infrastructure or new programs? Of course, the public would have missed out on the entertainment value of candidates in unflattering photos.