I imagine that many readers often wonder why political ads on television, radio, or online repeat the same sentences over and over again. I believe the reason is because listeners or watchers do not take the time to listen carefully and get a full message. The result is the people putting out the ads feel they have to overwhelm the audiences with repetition so that there is an ultimate impression created by the sheer volume of the ads.
Well, I am going to take a deep dive into one such ad — a recurring ad attacking a candidate in my district, the 17th Congressional District of New York. The candidate is Cait Conley, the Democrat who is running against the sitting Republican Congressman Mike Lawler. The ad is not by the Lawler campaign but rather by one of these “educational” organizations, which is only identified by three letters.
The way the ad is constructed is fascinating.
“Don’t be fooled by Cait Conley. She supports raising taxes on working people making less than $75,000 a year, just like AOC,” the ad said, in part.
The beauty of the second sentence is that they cover two very important parts of the Republican pitch for retaining control of Congress. First, the fear of socialism. That fear is stoked by reference to AOC, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a well-known left-wing member of Congress. The second issue is an old saw that has been used for decades — Democrats want to raise taxes on working people and Republicans want to cut them.
Now, it is true that Cait Conley is on record opposing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which made many of the temporary tax cuts of the 2017 law permanent. Since some of those tax cuts from 2017 reduced taxes on low- to moderate-income people (but note, only those with income high enough to pay federal income tax), voting against the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would sunset all the tax cuts from 2017. That involves a slight increase in taxes on people making less than $75,000 a year. On the other hand, voting against that bill also prevents millions of dollars in Medicaid and SNAP cuts — and also prevents making permanent the very significant tax cuts for high-income people.
Then the ad goes on to do it again, with a different policy. “She supports government-dominated health care, just like [Zohran] Mamdani,” the ad said, in part. Again, the ad references an individual who most viewers know of — the mayor of New York City — who is a democratic socialist. Then the ad gets tricky. It refers to government-dominated healthcare. But guess what this is — Medicare. There is very strong support for expanding Medicare so that it covers the entire population. The ad very carefully does not explain that “government-dominated healthcare” happens to be a very popular program, Medicare.
By the way, according to Cait Conley’s campaign website, she does not support replacing private insurance with “Medicare for All” but merely wants to expand opportunities for citizens to enroll in Medicare as a “public option” for health insurance.
The final jab in the ad states that the “socialists” who support Mamdani and AOC also support Ms. Conley. That is true of some socialists — the coalition that supports Conley’s campaign includes the left-wing Working Families Party, which has its own ballot line in New York State, and some members of the Democratic Socialists of America are on record as supporting a vote for Conley against Lawler. (It is also true that there are many members of DSA who are publicly refusing to vote for Conley.) The anti-Trump, anti-Lawler coalition also includes disaffected Republicans, very moderate (some would say establishment) Democrats, and independents who are not affiliated with any political party.
In a very threatening tone, the ad concludes, “and you know what happens when these [socialists] are in charge.” Obviously conjuring up Stalin’s Russia, Mao’s China, Castro’s Cuba and Venezuela under Chavez. That approach works well in Florida, where many refugees from Venezuela and Cuba have settled. Some people in the 17th Congressional District might be moved by that approach.
So what have we witnessed in this particular ad?
First: tarring the candidate they want to beat as “similar to” some awful man or woman who would be terrible if she or he got into power
Second: claiming that support for Medicare is support for “government-dominated health care,” which sounds much more scary than Medicare
Third: claiming that opposing Trump’s massive tax cut in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is akin to wanting to raise taxes on moderate-income people
Fourth: warning, in effect, that supporting candidate Conley would be a first step toward a brutal communist dictatorship.
If this were not a family radio station, I would respond with a barnyard epithet. I wonder how effective this garbage will be.
Michael Meeropol is a professor emeritus of economics at Western New England University. He is the author, with Howard and Paul Sherman, of the recently published second edition of "Principles of Macroeconomics: Activist vs. Austerity Policies."
The views expressed by commentators are solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of this station or its management.