AAC
SEEMS TO ME...
Keep it clean — the campaign, that is.
S
eems to me, words matter. So do actions and intent. This is 2022 — an election year for county officials in Arkansas along with many other offices. Let’s keep it clean — the campaigns! You will never regret being kind. As my mother might say, “anyone with one eye and half sense” would agree that we find ourselves in a very politically polarized time; a time of partisan bickering that keeps government from working like it should to provide protections and services for the people. It starts on the campaign trail and continues in the halls of Congress, in the Statehouses, in the courthouses and city halls. We have lost ground when the words “conservative” and “liberal” are hurled as insults as opposed to them being used to provide a general picture of a person’s political persuasion. Especially when the vast majority of the populace tends to be “moderate”. A moderate is conservative on some issues; liberal on others; but has the wisdom and fortitude to work with others to reach a compromise for the good of all. Notice that I used “compromise” as a noun — not a verb. Used as a verb it takes on the connotation of imperiling or jeopardizing with an attached idiom of “cook one’s goose” or “play havoc with.” Using the word “compromise” as a noun means a settlement or agreement reached by mutual concession with the attached idiom of “happy medium.” Our nation, state and counties are comprised of people that represent different backgrounds, political philosophies, races, professions, and religious persuasions. We must look upon diversity of experiences as a strength rather than something to exploit for political gain. I believe county officials can, should, and must set the standard for political discourse for others to follow. And we can start this political campaign season, if you haven’t already, by challenging those that want to divide us by communicating in a manner that upholds the ideal that our republic democracy is grounded in the respect and dignity of every man and woman. Seems to me that with each successive election cycle we see and hear more negativity. More time and money is spent to attack and belittle the character of a candidate’s opponent rather than using the time, money, and effort to espouse the candidate’s virtues and his or her views on relevant issues for the office being sought. Many years ago, humorist Will Rogers said, “Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.” That statement is truer today than the day Rogers said it. Why? I’ve already ad18
dressed it. It’s because of the mean and dirty tone of our political campaigns which sets the stage for the same type of governing. Can candidates win elections by running positive campaigns? Absolutely. Eddie A. Jones A positive campaign is a campaign County Consultant in which a candidate focuses primarily on relevant issues related to the office for which they are a candidate, their own views, their own experiences, and their own virtues — without attacking their opponent in an attempt to gain votes. On the other hand, a negative campaign is one where a candidate uses attack ads and rhetoric to deliberately frame his or her opponent as foolish, inexperienced, irresponsible, disconnected, or just a bad person as a means of presenting him or herself as a more desirable alternative. Why anyone would listen to that kind of malarkey is beyond me. Campaign and win on your own merits — not someone else’s demerits. Dirty campaigns [that’s what I call them] are nothing new. Negative campaigns go at least as far back as Cicero and the Roman Republic. In the United States, specifically, smear campaigns have a long and dishonorable tradition, all the way back to the first contested American presidential election in 1796. But, just because dirty campaigning has existed for centuries does not mean that it’s right. Words matter. In democracies, elections are essentially popularity contests — the possible exception being the presidential election which has the Electoral College to complicate things and make it possible for a candidate to win the popular vote and still lose an election. However, that’s the exception and not the rule. If, then, the goal of candidates is to get the majority of voters to “like” them, human psychology would support the argument that their best option would be to behave and campaign positively. People naturally prefer positive people to negative ones. They naturally respond better to those who are kind than those who are not. Logically, then, the ideal strategy for a candidate would be to make his or her campaign as positive and cordial as possible. The best way for a candidate to increase favorability among voters is to run a positive campaign. Much has been written about voters’ attitudes towards elections, their perceptions, and how positive and negative campaigns affect voters differently. Americans love to hate political campaigns. Majorities believe that negative, attack-oriented campaigning is undermining and damagCOUNTY LINES, WINTER 2022
