It is not an exact parallel, but the tone of Sir Keir Starmer's current campaign ads. is strongly reminiscent of that of the Republicans' personalised attack on Michael Dukakis in the 1988 US presidential contest. There is the same resort to an emotive issue (murder and race in the American case, child sex abuse in the British), and the same strongly personal nature of the attack. One would like to think that there was a backlash against the anti-Dukakis ads., but glimpses over the years of TV promotions of candidates for Congress or for party selection as presidential candidacy suggest that ad hominem attacks are still a normal part of the political campaigner's armoury. This became clear to a wide audience from day one of Donald Trump's race to the White House - and Trump has not stopped to this day.
It is fair enough to attack Sunak and his supporters for their actions in government, even their political ideology. What is wrong is the negative, innuendo-ridden personal attack in such a sensitive area.
Even if Sir Keir does not see the wisdom of returning to the moral high ground, he should consider this: anything Labour can do, the Tories can do nastier. In a race to the bottom, they can get there faster and with fewer scruples. Tighter election spending rules in the UK than in the US should prevent the voter being swamped by the tide, but he or she could still suffer the backwash of a very dirty campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment