Sometimes candidates use negative statements as part of their campaign strategy. An example would be TV attack ads we saw in recent federal elections. However, there is a fundamental problem with this approach, and there is a price to pay, both by the candidate using negative statements, and by society as a whole.
Basically negative statements are either entirely false, or partly true but negative in that all the facts or the proper context is not given. The text is typically spiced with lots of adjectives. The statements are designed to put someone or a group in a bad light.
The technique is only effective because the person or campaign against whom it is used, is not there to defend, refute, or explain. But a negative seed has been planted and it grows as gossip tends to do. Genuine people, as individuals, soon become vilified in their absence.
On Facebook and Twitter one does not have the space to adequately refute a negative statement. These statements are often made anonymously. Similarly, when a voter picks up a printed campaign document full of negative statements, one is not there to refute either.
My Approach
What to do? I firmly believe that negative campaigning is wrong and cowardly. That is why my campaign will continue to focus on the positive, both in terms of what I have done and stand for, as well as how I will relate to the other candidates. I know that the existing council and city staff are sincere, hardworking people who do not deserve to have aspersions cast on them.
Should any voter have a concern as a result of negative information, I or my campaign staff will be happy to discuss this and provide the correct facts.
I trust voters will see through negative/attack campaigning and will understand that it is a reflection of the person or group employing the technique.
