A non-native looks at the two-party system

By MARK MAATHUIS

Cartoon courtesy of cartoonstock.com

In a two-party system, there are two ways to win an election.

The first one is to get more votes than your opponent. This means convincing the public you are the man or woman for the job. Your platform must be more appealing to the voters than your opponent’s. You have to get out and tell them what your plans are and descibe how you are going to achieve them. Do not forget the importance of polls and surveys: they tell you what the public wants. Then, based on the intersection between your beliefs and what you think your potential constituents want, you figure out your political direction. This involves making choices and risking losing votes: you cannot appeal to everyone, but with a thorough explanation, people will see the benefits of your positions.

This takes time. People have to familiarize themselves with the content of your platform and your opponent’s platform. It takes effort, too. The voters must understand which candidate offers the best plan for their future. But don’t expect them to spend too much time thinking about you and your ideas. You are the candidate and politics is your game. You want to make it easy for the public; you want to pamper them.

This is where the second method comes in: Make sure your opponent gets fewer votes than you do. This method is much easier. Instead of pondering programs, the future, or the public interest, focus entirely on “the other guy.” Dive into his high school yearbook, go through his garbage, talk to his former colleagues to find something, anything, you can use against him. When you discover something, inform the public immediately of the flaw in his or her character. Two things are important: Make sure you pull the discovery out of context and exaggerate it. Your message must be short and simple. Again, you don’t want the public to have to think too much.

Questions are catchy: “Do you want a representative who does/ is/ supports — fill in the blank–?” Or, even better, a threat: “The other guy does/ is/supports-–fill in the blank–. If you vote for him it means you are as despicable as he is.”

In the last few weeks voters have been hot with the following accusations: Tennessee Republican senatorial candidate Bob Corker lives in a 30-room mansion and has six SUV’s. Bob Casey, Pennsylvania Democratic senatorial candidate, only works 50 percent of the time as his state’s treasurer, but is paid a full-time salary; his opponent, Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, destroys jobs; and Virginia’s Democratic senatorial candidate Jim Webb writes novels about incest and homosexuality. The message is clear: Unless you are a perverted, devil worshiper who wants to destroy the United States, do not vote for the other guy. Vote for me because I’m not him.

Ultimately, your goal as a candidate is to drive a wedge between the voters and the other candidate. And, with the two party system, that means the public has only one other way to go. In the end, it is the non-loser who takes it all.