Barrage of negative political ads has a negative effect on democracy

“Thank God, it is almost over!” That seems to be the collective sentiment of the voters who have had to endure weeks of attack ads and drivel dished out by candidates for political office in Missouri.

First, there was the barrage of “our side” commercials. Particularly in the U.S. Senate race, voters were treated with contempt as the candidates claimed they were on “our side” while their opponents were not. How stupid do they think we are?

This approach is demeaning to voters. It’s as if we are all in the third grade picking sides for kickball at recess. Do they really view the electorate as elementary school students too dumb to figure things out for ourselves without being told whose side they are on?

The “our side” commercials are not only demeaning to the voters; they are also harmful to the country. We are supposed to be one nation, under God, indivisible. But the politicians have us looking upon those with a different view as unpatriotic or as traitors to the country. We need to be pulling together in this country, not ripping each other apart.

And boy, did they rip each other apart. The ad wizards for Jim Talent and Claire McCaskill sunk to new depths as they sought to portray the other candidate as being low down, dirty, lying and a no-good son of a gun.

Conventional wisdom is that negative ads work, and that’s why they are produced. I don’t think they work at all. I think they do great harm to the democratic process. They turn voters off and add mightily to the disdain that so many have for politics. They take good people apart and paint them as liars, cheats and thieves.

And, amazingly, the politicians who say “I approved this message” don’t even believe the ads themselves.

In the debates for U.S. Senate, the real Jim Talent (not the one packaged by the political consultants) said he really didn’t believe Claire McCaskill had horns and a tail.

And, when prodded, McCaskill had to admit that Talent was a good and intelligent man. She lamented the fact that the Talent ads painted her in such a negative light and that he found it necessary to attack her. That’s what his handlers told him he had to do to win this race, she noted. At least some truth was spoken during this campaign.

Then, we were treated to the ever-popular “family values” ploy. McCaskill emphasized her “family values” by trotting out her mom and daughter in a cozy kitchen scene. Talent used a variation on this phrase in the Springfield debate when he said McCaskill did not reflect “Southwest Missouri values.”

The “family values” catchphrase may have just about run its course. In previous election cycles, it was all you heard. Just like the “on our side / not on our side” approach, family values came out of focus group testing. The consultants determined that those words hit a nerve with voters. And the barrage of family values ads was born.

Will all the negative ads and contempt for the voters ever end? Could we ever go back to the days when politicians took note of “my esteemed opponent” and talked about issues that matter instead of spewing hate and fear? I hope so. For sake of our beloved democracy, I hope so. But I am not very optimistic about it.