Negative campaigning has become the weapon of choice for challengers’ facing an established incumbent. Challengers use negative advertisement to disrupt the tendency of voters to for the incumbents. The challenger must be able to convince the voters that the incumbent is unfit to hold their position. Although incumbents also resort to negative campaigning many times they only do so when they are faced with potential threat. In the third congressional race, Jerry Labriola is determined to break to bond between the voter’s and the Rosa DeLauro.
According to Herrnson’s Congressional Elections, negative campaigning is a legitimate form of campaign communications that has the potential to enhance the electoral process (Herrnson 176). Negative campaigning is used to illuminate the unflattering and scandalous attributes and a practice of the competing candidates which is said to forces them to be held accountable for their actions. Although I disagree with this justification for dirty mudslinging, negative campaigning is a very popular practice especially among challengers facing an otherwise untouchable opponent. Republican Jerry Labriola has come to depend on this tactic to combat the Democratic incumbent Rosa DeLauro. Currently, Labriola has released campaign commercials that question DeLauro’s pervious actions and beliefs. He makes it seem as if the voters will be in serious trouble if they re-elect DeLauro.
However, Rosa DeLauro has not resort to this type of negative campaigning. I have yet to discover any negative campaign ads released by DeLauro against her opponent. The reason maybe that she does not feel threaten. She has been able to consolidate her lead so there is really no reason to go negative like Labriola. I do not believe that his approach will help him win the election but it may make a few people reconsider voting for her.
No comments:
Post a Comment