I’ve been hearing a lot of people complain about what they term negative campaigning. These same people tell me that they only want to hear a candidate say what they have done in the past and what they will do in the future. Basically, they want a resume recital. It seems to me that if anyone attempts to draw any contrast to their opponent, it suddenly falls into the category of negative.
In this fantasy-land scenario, these voters are practically begging to be lied to. “Sure”, says candidate A, “I promise you clear skies, smooth roads, no taxes, and a perfect future if you vote for me”. If candidate B says, “Candidate A is lying to you because he has no skills to to change the weather, no funds to repair roads, and no fiscal plan to eliminate taxes”, suddenly, B is labeled a negative campaigner. Welcome to Hawaii, ground-zero for passive/aggressive behavior in the Pacific.
I’m not even going to try and pretend to understand this mentality because I want candidates who clearly delineate differences and donʻt make me guess where they stand on an issue. I want candidates who arenʻt afraid to point out that their opponent has lied and will continue to do so if left unchecked. I also want a candidate who isn’t afraid to paint a picture of what the world will look like if their opponent is elected. Especially if that world is full of cronies that have been hiding under the candidate’s skirt during the election.
In a nutshell, hereʻs my take on what does and does not constitute negative campaigning.
Negative Campaigning Is:
* Unfounded or unprovable accusations
* Unflattering stories about family members
* Modifying photos to make an opponent look sinister
* Harping repeatedly on a single issue to the exclusion of all else
* Questioning an opponent’s character based on here say
Negative Campaigning Is Not:
* Comparing and contrasting past performance
* Questioning plans and asking for specifics
* Highlighting ethical lapses that, while not illegal, indicate problems
So, if you can handle a little difference of opinion, stop whining about negative campaigning and vote for a candidate that actually wants to do something instead of telling you what you want to hear.
I’m Positive It Isn’t Negative
08/09/2012I’ve been hearing a lot of people complain about what they term negative campaigning. These same people tell me that they only want to hear a candidate say what they have done in the past and what they will do in the future. Basically, they want a resume recital. It seems to me that if anyone attempts to draw any contrast to their opponent, it suddenly falls into the category of negative.
In this fantasy-land scenario, these voters are practically begging to be lied to. “Sure”, says candidate A, “I promise you clear skies, smooth roads, no taxes, and a perfect future if you vote for me”. If candidate B says, “Candidate A is lying to you because he has no skills to to change the weather, no funds to repair roads, and no fiscal plan to eliminate taxes”, suddenly, B is labeled a negative campaigner. Welcome to Hawaii, ground-zero for passive/aggressive behavior in the Pacific.
I’m not even going to try and pretend to understand this mentality because I want candidates who clearly delineate differences and donʻt make me guess where they stand on an issue. I want candidates who arenʻt afraid to point out that their opponent has lied and will continue to do so if left unchecked. I also want a candidate who isn’t afraid to paint a picture of what the world will look like if their opponent is elected. Especially if that world is full of cronies that have been hiding under the candidate’s skirt during the election.
In a nutshell, hereʻs my take on what does and does not constitute negative campaigning.
Negative Campaigning Is:
* Unfounded or unprovable accusations
* Unflattering stories about family members
* Modifying photos to make an opponent look sinister
* Harping repeatedly on a single issue to the exclusion of all else
* Questioning an opponent’s character based on here say
Negative Campaigning Is Not:
* Comparing and contrasting past performance
* Questioning plans and asking for specifics
* Highlighting ethical lapses that, while not illegal, indicate problems
So, if you can handle a little difference of opinion, stop whining about negative campaigning and vote for a candidate that actually wants to do something instead of telling you what you want to hear.
Share this:
Related
Posted in commentary |