Voters hate negative ads; but who is to blame?
When will the candidates for elected office ever get a clue? The people are sick to death of negative campaigning and attack ads. This election year seems to be the worst in recent memory. Please listen to the voters. We don’t care what your distorted view of the other candidate is; we want to know what you will do in office. There is little chance that your perspective on the other candidate is accurate or meaningful; you can, however, be accurate in your portrayal of yourself. Don’t tell me why I shouldn’t vote for the other person; tell me why I should vote for you. Based on the majority of political ads showing up on television and the radio, none of these candidates deserves to be elected.
Oh, and you might want to make issues important when they deserve it, not just when it is politically viable. We are paying attention to you, and it is not a flattering image for future elected officials.
Mark Phipps, Broomfield
…
Thanks to the 527s and to some unprincipled campaign advisers and their candidates, we Coloradans are being pummeled with attack ads and media spots filled with character assassinations and ugliness.
The sad truth is that we voters have no one to blame but ourselves. We listen to and are swayed by these sick-o-spots. If we were to punish sleaze by refusing to vote for its purveyors, the candidates and the political parties would stop. It’s our own fault, and we ought to demand better. We deserve better, and need to tune out this useless negativity.
A rule of thumb: If the ad doesn’t give you insight into a candidate’s stance on the issues, then tune it out; turn it off. After all, electioneering was always meant to convince us to vote for someone, not against someone else.
If you vote for those using sleazy ads, don’t be surprised by the kinds of representation you wind up with. The “sleazers” are signaling that they mean to be as vicious and as deceptive as they can be. They think this is the key to your vote. But is this what you truly want in office representing you? I don’t.
Rabbi Joel R. Schwartzman, Lone Tree
Campaign finance laws
Re: “Campaign finance laws are ineffectual,” Oct. 22 Gail Schoettler column.
As long as the pursuit of private profit remains the organizing principle of this society, judges are unlikely to undermine the extremely bizarre notion that money equals speech in democratic governance. The idea that someone with more money should therefore have more voice in how things are run is at least deeply anti-democratic, if not insane as a way of running a government that ostensibly acts on behalf of its citizens.
Oh wait, I forgot, the “invisible hand of the market” fetish sorts it all out in the end if you just believe in money-speech hard enough. Oh my yes, look how it sorts out the growing number of undeserving poor ones from the ever-tightening group of ultra-worthy haves intent on having it all.
Maybe we should simply admit, not that “money and politics go hand in hand,” but that private money needs to be entirely banished from politics, and adopt publicly financed campaign funding with harsh penalties for monied interests who try to buy influence.
Bruce McNaughton, Denver
Goals for the election and the next Congress
Re: “Hastert, Pelosi gain attention,” Oct. 26 editorial.
The editorials in last Thursday’s Denver Post end with a hopeful phrase that can serve as a goal for our fall elections: “a clean Congress, with public service rather than partisan maneuvering as its daily chore.” Indeed, Congress is not working. We need a Congress imbued with a commitment to the common good. That phrase – the common good – is again coming in to vogue and well it should. That indeed is the purpose of government. It seems many of our country’s leaders have lost sense of the general welfare of its citizens. At the same time, as citizens of a democracy we each have a serious and required role to play as conscientious voters, as it is in our hands to select our leaders. We need to rid Congress of those whose central concern is with partisan and special-interest politics and power rather than with respecting minority rights and listening to the voices of the people.
Betty Voss, Denver
To send a letter
E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 101 W. Colfax Ave., Suite 600, Denver, 80202
Fax: 303-954-1502
Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 200 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address and day and evening phone numbers. Letters may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.
To reach us by phone: 303-954-1331
