Do nasty attacks on someone's character work?
“I went to a mud-wrestling event, and a political campaign broke out!” That is a new take on an old joke, but this year it seems like going negative is the default setting for some campaigns. It’s been going on for years, but are people sick of it? And are they so sick of it that negative ads actually backfire? And when you are the victim of the negative attack, does it pay to fight back?
I am sure there is a science to this, or no one would go negative. For some, it’s measuring out the negativity carefully, trying to stick to calling out an incumbent on his or her record, for instance. If you attack all the time, the negativity becomes more about you than your opponent. Bill Clinton became more of a victim as attacks intensified against him during the Lewinsky scandal. Even though he eventually admitted lying to Congress, he was easier to forgive than the Republicans who focused on it. For others, it’s a matter of letting someone else do it. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth did this to great effect against John Kerry in 2004.
In this election cycle we are getting some of this in our local contests. In the Republican primary for State House District 22, some 527 in Bradenton is sending out mailers that accuse John Deakins and Keith Perry of being liberals. On the Star 99.5 FM’s “Talk of the Town,” host Jake Fuller suggested that this leaves Remzey Samarrai as the beneficiary of this attack. And I have spoken to one v0ter who has declared a change in his vote from Samarrai to Keith Perry because of it. So, this ad seems to have backfired if it was intended to drive conservative Republican voters to Samarrai.
The shame of this is that I have met all of these gentlemen, and I know two of them quite well. And I would classify NONE of them as a liberal! By law, Remzey Samarrai can have no coordination with a 527. So, is this a group of individuals who just sincerely believe that Perry and Deakins are secret liberals? If they are, they are a group of numbskulls that haven’t gotten their facts right. I feel bad for Remzey, because I know what it’s like to get public support from a group of numbskulls. When Dove World Outreach put up a sign attacking my opponent earlier this year, I got tarred with their horrible reputation, and it’s not unreasonable to think they cost me the election.
In another local Republican Primary, Congressman Cliff Stearns is facing Don Browning, darling of the local Tea Party. Someone forwarded an email to me that said Don Browning was not pro-life. This is a pretty serious charge in a Republican Primary, and it came from someone who didn’t like Browning’s answers on a questionnaire put out by the Florida Family Policy Council. I contacted the Browning campaign and they tell me that they have been getting smeared by fliers stuck under people’s windshields at Tea Party meetings. I haven’t seen these fliers, but I do believe that Don Browning is pro-life. And I think this is a cheap shot, regardless of who is taking it. This helps the Stearns campaign only if people find the charge to be credible. Unfortunately for Don Browning, he only has about a tenth of the money Stearns has to get his message out.
Last, but not least, is our District 3 School Board race. Jodi Wood has been complaining that Gunnar Paulson’s campaign has been stealing signs, arranging unfounded complaints to DCF about his family, and spreading lies about him. This will only fly if Wood is perceived as credible in all other ways. After all, if these things are really happening, who could keep silent about it? If they are not true, then there is something else going on that Wood is blaming on his biggest rival. So, voters must ask themselves, “Has Jodi Wood been a credible, sensible candidate up until he made the accusations?” If he has, he is more likely to be taken seriously. And if he is, this makes Gunnar Paulson look like one sinister character. Unfortunately, this matter takes the voters’ eyes off the ball: who will best represent the interests of parents, children and teachers?
I believe this will boil down to how quick on the trigger the voters are to believe the worst about a candidate. And this year, they are all getting a harder look. If you hurl the mud, your aim had better be true. Because you will also be judged on your marksmanship.
