Pamphleteering

Election day for the Primaries here in Washington State is a couple of weeks away, and that means that ballots have gone out, and, preceding them, the Voters' Pamphlets. Pamphlet isn't really the word for them in most election cycles, this year's is 95 pages long; although this may be simply a function of the fact that King County is the most populous in the state, and, like many counties in western states, is rather large. Accordingly, there are a number of state and federal legislative districts that need to be accounted for.

For offices, like United States Representative, County Council member or State Supreme Court Justice, the half-page candidate statements are a bit of free advertising; as far as people actually read them, at least. (When I was in my old apartment, the trash car near the mailboxes tended to collect Voters' Pamphlets.) But, perhaps out of a sense of masochism, I do tend to read them, especially given that not all candidates for office send out campaign postcards, and I don't watch television any more.

Personally, I don't really find the candidate statements to be all that informative about the candidate's positions on things; if they're going to be forthcoming, their website, if they have one, is the place to look for that sort of information. So the Voters' Pamphlet is more useful as a source of insight into society; or, perhaps more accurately, what candidates, parties and political consultants thing will play well.

Talking about family is big; a number of candidates say how many children, and sometimes grandchildren, they have, and it's not all that uncommon to find mentions of pets (especially if they are rescues). Partisan buzzwords also put in an appearance; the Seattle area, and thus, King County as a whole, is fairly Blue, so Republicans tended to use low-key language to signal an affiliation with President Trump. Not quite "dog-whistle" subtle, but nothing particularly overt. Another interesting thing about the local Republicans was the number of candidates who described themselves as first-generation immigrants. primarily from Europe and Asia.

There was also a lot of talk about how broken and unresponsive government was. A number of people were running as "outsiders," and pledging to make government more transparent, more efficient and more answerable to the public. "The taxes are two damn high," was a constant refrain. Which I get; telling people that one is going to fix how broke they feel is a time-tested tactic; even if no-one ever seems to bring the promised feelings of wealth and prosperity once in office. It's something of a vicious cycle, I think; promise to make people feel more flush, only to have the next challenger to come along double down on the idea that people are justified in their feelings of poverty. For the supposed wealthiest nation on the face of the Earth, politics is often laser-focused on how much money people don't have.

But, I guess it works... otherwise, people would quit doing it. But I do think that part of the reason that people feel both poor and powerless is the constant litany of political advertising by candidates claiming that they can solve those problems. Creating the need works in other forms of advertising... it makes sense that it works here, as well.