Garbage. Hitler. Low IQ. Fascist. Gross incompetent. Unstable. Obsessed. How elegant our political speech has become.

It all sounds like an electronic toy we had in the house when the kids were little. You pushed a button on the Insultinator, and it would emit from a library of words, a rude sentence. Something like this: “You’re a boring, stupid, obnoxious loser!” in a grating voice. Like our candidates, this green plastic gadget could create many variations of insults. Luckily my kids survived this ridiculous item with their manners intact.

Balzac’s idea that you can find a crime behind every fortune has an analog in politics. Behind every win you can find nastiness, if not dirty tricks.

Presidential campaigns have always produced low-blow moments. Both hilarious and sad was film showing Massachusetts Governor and presidential candidate Mike Dukakis riding in an Abrams tank at a General Dynamics factory in Michigan. The diminutive Dukakis appeared grinning in a jump suit (his necktie visible) and “cranial” enveloping his head. He looked downright silly. Even his own people realized it. The George H. W. Bush campaign of 1988 also knew it and made a devastating television commercial out of it.

The ill sentiments have always been there, but the language was more sophisticated and at least funny. Some wag once said of Ronald Reagan, “You could walk through Ronald Reagan’s deepest thoughts and not get your ankles wet.”

After the “garbage” comment by President Biden, former President Trump managed to make humor of it by conjuring up a new-looking municipal trash truck and riding around in it — sans hard hat. Former President Barack Obama famously finessed being handed a football helmet, wisely not donning it.

Political striving has always run nasty. But not since the Civil War have we heard the type of invective we’re hearing now. I think most Americans lament that such coarse talk could make its way into a presidential race.

The candidates may not personally detest one another; it’s just business. Yet often they do detest one another, but manage to keep the language more or less civil in public.

Franklin Roosevelt disliked Thomas E. Dewey, who in the campaign referred not so subtly to Roosevelt’s age and his visibly declining health. Late at night after the 1944 election, it was clear Roosevelt had won. Dewey, an able man in many respects, lacked courtesy to send the customary telegram of congratulation. Various accounts relate that FDR, before going to bed very late, remarked of Dewey, “I still think he’s a son of a bitch.”

But that was in private. Today it would be on X.

Thankfully, for the most part, the civil service these candidates hope to lead is civil. Federal venues aren’t love-fests more than any other workplace, but people don’t tend to berate one another out loud.

Earlier this week, I attended the annual conference of one of the biggest federal support organizations, ACTIAC. Everyone in the information technology business knows what it stands for: From the federal side, the American Council for Technology. Years ago it combined with the Industry Advisory Council.

I attended the very first IAC confab, dubbed the Executive Leadership Conference (ELC) in 1991. Then, about 150 people gathered to discuss topics such as the future of local area networks and how the exploding population of PCs would change government operations. This week about 1,200 people attended, discussing artificial intelligence, customer experience, low-code development and other contemporary topics.

These gatherings bring together people from corporate rivalries, or people whose bids were not chosen for awards by federal tech executives they might sit next to at lunch. Someone new in a job someone else applied for. Like in so many market fish tanks, people understand the rules for civilized  behavior. Sure, you never know the context in which you might encounter someone, so there’s a practical side to courtesy. But it’s also a lot more respectful and self-respecting way to deal with one another.

In the Defense Department, where civilians and uniforms work side-by-side, I’ve always admired the convention of referring to uniforms by their rank, and to civilians by their honorifics such as Mr., Mrs., or Ms. It sounds a bit quaint in this age, but in reality it reinforces respect and a culturally acceptable way to navigate situations.

Candidates’ lack of respect for one another in recent elections has spilled into denigration of the voters. One TV commentator described a certain demographic expressing intent to vote for one of the candidates as “cockroaches voting for Raid.” Clever.

We can do better with one another.

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.