2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Did Bernie's wife commit a felony when she secured a loan for Burlington College? [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)I don't necessarily buy off on it so I won't give it any play here, but as you noted, these things do take on a life of their own. And vetted "pickles" for some odd reason (see Reagan/Iran-Contra) take on a teflon coating that causes any shit flung at them to just slide away. The American public is sometimes like a temperamental child who has seen that toy already, and demands a new one. It's the oddest thing.
Anyone who thinks that personal details (translation--scandals, quirks, "stories," what-have-you), too, will be put aside in favor of 'issues' in a general election scenario is pipe dreaming. The issue framing, the compare-and-contrast, happens very early in the general. After that, it's the whole 'beer' thing (which was weird with Bush, since he was a recovering alcoholic...but it didn't matter to some people). Minds are made up quickly, even though there's a massive segment (as there is every Presidential election) of assholes who pretend to be oh-so-coyly undecided, so that people might pay attention to them and try to "convince" them of something they've already figured out on their own.
About the only time that an emphasis on personal details can backfire is when the opposition takes it a step too far. Scott Brown's campaign was gaining traction with the "Fauxahontas" accusations, but then, when a bunch of his bone-headed supporters confronted a bunch of Warren supporters on the street and started doing the "Tomahawk Chop" and "war whoop" -- and someone, mercifully, was there WITH A CAMERA--that is when the tide started to turn. People were repulsed at the unbridled racism, frankly.
As for the primaries, the candidates on our side have pretty much sketched out their stances on the issues. Two clicks and you're there if you're confused about any stance. People don't really want a discussion of "issues," they want to compare and contrast appearance and tone. They want to cheerlead. Each thinks their candidate will do better at the "acting" that is involved on the political stage. And for the clueless who might tune in, who aren't even wired into the candidates at all, it's all about the acting and the "show."
It's not "issues" that have put Donald Trump in front of the GOP field--he has his head up his ass, talking about what he'd do like he's a king who doesn't have to get every appropriation vetted by Congress (once the field is narrowed, he'll be called to answer on that score). What has put him out in front to this point is that clownish show he's been putting on...the bellowing, the name-calling, the blunt sexism, the outlandish, pie-in-the-sky proclamations that appeal to the lizard brain... it's "That's Entertainment!" on the political stage.