Responding to Attacks

Have you noticed the recent uptick in personal attacks during the political campaigns around the country? Most people do not claim to like negative attacks like this, so why do campaigns run them? It's simple. Despite negative reactions to this type of campaigning, it is effective. If left unchallenged, people may believe the attacks, even if they are not true. If the candidate who has been attacked responds, the response to the attack gets them off their main message and puts them on the defensive.

So what should campaigns do when they are attacked? Some campaigns run counter-ads to either refute the attacks of their opponent or counter-attack the other candidate. This can work sometimes because the refutation may be necessary. However, this often spins out of control and is counter-productive. It is fine to briefly address the facts related to the attacks if they are not true. However, the most important thing to do is to remind voters why your opponent is resorting to personal attacks. This kind of gutter politics is necessary when you can't win on the issues.

I am writing this because I want to encourage Republican candidates this Fall to stay on message. The Democrats want you to waste time fighting their attacks rather than sharing your vision for the future of the economy, your state and our country. It is this message that has led you ahead in many polls. The voters want to know how you are going to get us back on track and get government out of our lives. They don't care that much if you unknowingly hired an illegal nanny or other things about your past that have little or nothing to do with how you will govern. These attacks will pass over much quicker if you move on with your message to the people. Trying to address it too much will just keep the issue alive. We are in a fight over issues much bigger than small issues in people's past.