Negative remarks in political campaigns disturb me.

Monday, November 06, 2000

Negative remarks in political campaigns disturb me. When against someone I respect, they irritate; when made by someone I respect, they disappoint. When someone I respect becomes attacked, I tend to become defensive of that person; if that person is the attacker, I begin to lose respect. I dream about an election without negativity, and the image that emerges resembles Camelot but nothing around here.

In the present campaign, I thought several times I had pinned down who is negative and who is innocent. Each time, yet another negative ad or statement came to attention and I revised. Each candidate I have spoken to about negative campaigning has convincingly assured me such is never the intent. Yet, I think some negatives have come from every campaign or, at least, someone is convinced there is even if not. From the very nature of political campaigns, it appears negatives are just inevitable, sometimes actually necessary, and yet always unpleasant.

The solution, I think, is to recognize negatives as well as positive factors are part of voter considerations and make strong effort to confine the negative to what is real and not merely a campaign gimmick.

I began with disgust at Mark Dayton’s disingenuous television ads strongly objecting to negative ads from Rod Grams. This ad itself is, of course, negative by its very nature. If Dayton actually judges the Grams ads to be genuinely negative, his protest is necessarily negative and ought to be accepted on that basis. Such is true concerning almost any charge of negative campaigning, not only by Dayton but any by Grams.

We also must assess the possibility that a charge of negative campaigning might be itself the worst kind. When a candidate knows the opponent’s ads are not unfairly negative and contain no factual error but seek to convince voters otherwise, it is a deceptive and dishonest gimmick.

Dayton, and every challenger, deserves a measure of tolerance of negativity. The incumbent can and must run on the record, which is then available for criticism. We can expect a challenger to be more negative out of necessity than the incumbent might be. These are political contests, and the nature of contests imposes itself upon elections. Voters need to sift out the campaign chaff to get down to the political kernels and grind them into the meal of a responsible decision.

At this point I heard what I felt to be a distinctly negative ad. It shot off a list of Rob Leighton votes as examples of wrong and for which he should be defeated and Jeff Anderson elected. As I listened, I felt it was unusually biting and strident and wondered about the wisdom. What shocked me was the disclaimer that it was placed without the consent or knowledge "of any candidate." That very much bothered me and still does. Although honestly identified as from the Republicans and determinedly disassociating Anderson from it, I don’t think any candidate can escape accountability by this device.

I talked with Anderson about it, and he seemed genuinely unfamiliar with its content and assured me he has clearly instructed his people to refrain from all such. I believe him.

I talked with Rob Leighton about it and found him understandably furious. He reminded me of his several campaigns and insists he has never been negative. I don’t recall his ever having been negative or attacking an opponent. Yet, I hear him using populist pejoratives such as "outside money pouring into this district" and "hired guns to bully into submission." Although not directed at his opponent, these are of course negatives.

I respect the political candidate who has positive substance to accentuate and criticizes the opponent negatively only when necessary. I disrespect those who use the negative dishonestly as a campaign gimmick. When I survey the ballots tomorrow – and I shall – I will be looking for the candidates whom I respect and in whom I can have confidence because of the way they have campaigned for my vote.

Wallace Alcorn’s column appears Mondays