A few years ago, the storied purveyor of such authentic Mexican delicacies as Cheesy Beefy Melt and Nachos BellGrande launched an ad campaign based on three simple words: “Change is Good.” At the time the slogan struck me as both sub-literate, like something from a self-help book for cavemen, and unreasonably optimistic–the changes in Michael Jackson’s face, for example, have not been so good. But now four of the leading 2008 presidential contenders are making essentially the same argument to convince us to vote for them. What’s good enough for chalupas, it seems, is good enough for Mitt Romney.
The Change Wars began on Sept. 5, when both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton launched ads called, conveniently enough, “Change.” Obama’s was business as usual–as the new kid in town, he’d built his entire campaign around hope and the audacity thereof. But Clinton’s was widely seen as strategic shift meant to neutralize Obama’s appeal to “change” voters. Her new slogan: “Ready for Change, Ready to Lead.” Obama, Clinton was arguing, may talk about change, but he isn’t “ready” to make it happen. And in case you missed the point, Clinton has spent the three weeks since then repeating a single catchphrase – “‘Change’ is just a word without the strength and experience to make it happen”–over and over again. And then over again.
Now Obama is fighting back. Today, his campaign premiered its first ad in New Hampshire, called “Believe.” The title is key. The spot features Obama staring into the camera and chastising “the cynics in Washington … [who] don’t believe we can actually change politics and bring an end to decades of division and deadlock,” before closing with a revamped tagline: “Change we can believe in.” Zing! On the pressing issue of change, says Kathleen Hall Jamieson, author of a dozen books on political messaging and director of the Annenberg School for Communications at the University of Pennsylvania, the ad “implies that Obama is more believable than other Dems”–namely Hillary, whom many voters see as cold and calculating.
Need more change? Luckily, John Edwards is also a fan. At last weekend’s Harkin Steak Fry in Indianola, Iowa, he asked “Iowans to send [him] a video message about change through a ‘ChangeCam’” and distributed “Big Change, Real Ideas” coins. So much change–literally! But what does it all mean? If Obama uses the concept of change to convey credibility and Clinton to convey experience, says Jamieson, Edwards is about boldness and authenticity. “Others promise change, but don’t plan to or can’t deliver it,” she says. “His change, however, is “real” and “big” –not the incremental change of the DLC and the Clinton era.” No word yet on whether his change is “tall” or “sharp.”
It’s easy, of course, for Democrats to chatter about change. Republicans have been running Washington for much of the past seven years–and Democrats are allegedly different from Republicans. But now even GOPers are getting in on the act. Last week, Mitt Romney released a new ad called “Change Begins With Us.” “If we’re going to change Washington,” he says in the spot, “Republicans have to put our own house in order.” Bravo, said the pundits. How brave. Of course, Romney’s critique of his fellow GOPers had nothing to do with their failure to be as centrist and competent as he was in Massachusetts. That would be gauche (and inconsistent with his new ultraconservative image). Instead, Romney says that Republicans “can’t be like Democrats–a party of big spending” that “pretends our borders are secure” and has “ethical standards that are a punch line for Jay Leno.” When in doubt, in other words, just blame the Dems.
Some things never change.
