I've been trying to figure out exactly what bugs me so much about the Democrats proposed, "Together, we can do better" slogan. After all, I liked "we can do better" when kerry said it, and liked it much more when Dean said it, but imagining it undergirding our 2006 strategy makes me feel, well, worse. But why?
The "together" may be part of it. You don't want much punctuation in your slogans, and the extra word is long and limp. Together, too, is a platitudinous term, an essential ingredient to every banal political cocktail. Fuck togetherness. The whole point is that we're not together, we can do better because They screwed up. There's no togetherness here, an election is the definition of division.
But that's not all of it. "We can do better" isn't right either. When Dean or Kerry said it, it didn't mean "we", it meant I. I can do better. Bush has done bad and I can do better. And if you vote for me, I will. That was simple, and it came at the close of speeches that explained what was wrong and, sometimes, how to fix it. It fit.
But this is a congressional election. Almost a thousand ambitious pols swarming the landscape and promising change, betterness, good things. You want to win congressional elections, your slogan needs to be sharper because your audience doesn't care. We can do better is to positive, to vague. How about: Health care for every American? An end to corruption? Business out of your government? Kill all the lobbyists? How about something that has a meaning, not just a ring?
We can do better than we can do better. But it means going out on a limb and saying something. Scary, I know. But we can do it. Together.
