Well, I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It’s almost like an Etch-a-Sketch — you can kind of shake it up, and we start all over again.
The idea that candidates "tack to the extremes during the primaries and then head for the center as the general election looms" (#) is hardly new. But candidates (or their advisors) don't normally say this out loud.
I think that the appeal of this term and its power as a metaphor is actually helping it spread. (Which works against Romney, obviously.) It makes a great headline:
- Santorum camp pounces on Romney adviser's 'Etch a Sketch' comment
- Romney adviser: Campaign is like an Etch A Sketch
- Etch A Sketch Mania Takes Hold of Campaign Conversation
4 comments:
Why did you sickify "adviser's"? Merriam-Webster (west of the pond) explicitly prefers it (relegating "advisor" to "also" status). The OED (from east of the pond, but universal) has full entries for both "adviser" and "advisor." Def. 1 of "advisor" is witness, a usage the OED labels both obsolete and rare. Def. 2 is "= adviser n. 1 (in various senses)." It isn't obvious from this that OED prefers "adviser," but it certainly doesn't consider it eccentric or "variant."
I still have two questions, only one of which you can answer. First, why didn't the OED just include "advisor" in its "adviser" entry, specifying that in the sense of witness only "advisor" was used. Second, even if "advisor" were the clear preference, why would you sic "adviser"?
Sorry. I meant to comment using this link instead.
This is embarrassing. This one.
"sic" removed.
Post a Comment