Just like popular television programming, we need to make politics more intoxicating for viewers. Enough debates; enough of the same smear ads over and over with different names. We need to make television viewers crave this (expletive). I’ve got two possible solutions here, but really, the options are endless. Here goes.
1. Reality television.
We need to put the two (or three – however many) candidates in the same house – just like MTV’s The Real World.
You know what this would mean? It would mean cussing, all levels of sassiness, and, of course, bleeped swearing.
Candidate A: Would you mind talking to me before you bring people back to the house late at night? I had a campaign stop this morning, and I didn’t get much sleep.
Candidate B: Alright. Whatever, (muffled expletive).
Candidate A: What did you say?! What did you say?!
Candidate B: I said you’re a (expletive).
Candidate A: Aw, hell no! Heeeell no!
Candidate B: What?! What?! I’ve got a 10-point lead in the Gallup polls! What difference did you hope your little campaign stop would make?!
Candidate A: Uh-uh! Uh-uh! (expletive) that! I fall within the margin of error!
Candidate B: Aw, (expletive) that! Margin of error?! This is a red state! Of course they want me! Candidate C is going to spoil your chances anyway! (expletive)!
Candidate C (from other room): Hey! Come on now! This is between the two of you! I’m all for reform! I’m not getting involved with this (expletive)!
Candidate A: (expletive) this. I’m calling my boyfriend from back home!
After Candidate A goes to the phone room, Candidates B and C exchange looks of anger and confusion, respectively.
2. My second method for making politics more fun to watch is even better.
They’d be televised. The candidates could bring whatever food they want – no foods barred, as it were – and the events would be covered just like football or basketball or baseball. I’m thinking we could bring in one sports announcer – let’s just say Bob Costas for arguments’ sake, because I like him. Then, we’d bring in Tim Russert for the political analysis while the food flies.
Costas: Well, it is a beautiful day for a food fight!
Russert: Yes it is, Bob. Yes it is.
Costas: Getting right to it – on the right side of your screen is Candidate A, the underdog, wearing the sensible black pants suit, and incumbent Candidate B is on the left, wearing gray with the blue tie.
Russert: Their state is split right down the middle, Bob, and each candidate hopes to make up some ground today.
Costas: And try they will. Here comes the whistle, and we are under way. Candidate B emerges from his corner with what appears to be a large pot of – is that lamb curry?
Russert: I’m receiving information, Bob, that it is indeed lamb curry. You’ve got to wonder where that will put him with conservative voters.
Costas: Indeed. One also wonders how effectively he will be able to fling the curry with that.I guess it’s a ladle? Some sort of large spoon, anyway. And he’s hit! Candidate B is hit! This is what I call “smear” campaigning! Candidate A delivers the first strike with – what is that, Tim? Can you see?
Russert: It’s mac-and-cheese, Bob. I think Candidate A is trying to show voters that she has not strayed from her Midwestern roots.
Costas: So we’d be assuming that this is very bland mac-and-cheese, then? Almost no flavor?
Russert: I can’t imagine anything else. This makes a strong statement only two months from Election Day, Bob. And that definitely helps her fantasy numbers.
Costas: An upset in the making. We will be right back after these messages.
Geoff Johnson is a senior English major. His column appears Tuesdays in the Collegian. Replies and feedback can be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org.