Goliath takes a note from David

I'm taking a quick break before my second post related to David Cay Johnston's work to interject at least a couple of other things while I finish my research for that.
So in the meantime...

Ok, I've noticed a couple of things while tracking this congressional race.

First, Colleen Callahan, the democratic candidate, from the outset has been using green as her primary advertising color. Could it be that she was aware of the growing movements collectively referred to as "green"? Things like alternative energy, recycling, conservation, climate change concerns, etc... Could it be that she knows there is growing public concern in these areas and she wanted to align herself with that concern in the voters' subconscious? It's at least a possibility.

Second, Aaron Schock, the republican candidate, just recently hit the airwaves with a new advertisement promoting his energy position. In this ad, he is seen numerous times walking in front of giant wind turbines. Clearly, in his case, he's very upfront about appealing to the public concerns here.

My point is not to deride these two for being conscious of this. Not at all. I support a candidate who is very conscious of this and has it as one of his key campaign points.

My point is that we've had someone all along who has known about everything green ...I mean, he is after all, running as a candidate for the Green Party. Schafer has been promoting alternative energy so much so that the photo on his most printed piece has him in front of ...you guessed it... a giant wind turbine. This piece has been in circulation for months.

Is it possible that Schock took a note from Schafer? Definitely possible, at least.

Perhaps we should think for a moment about what it means if the candidates of the two big parties are taking notes from the underdog. Maybe it means the underdog knows what the voters' concerns are ...and has all along. Maybe it means the underdog is a LEADER with VISION even to his opponents. Maybe it means the underdog is the guy we want representing us.

Would you rather have a candidate who figured out what "plays", or a representative who already KNEW and is in it for more than the "play"?