Truth or Negativity?

Some elected officials like to control the news. They put out newsletter after newsletter extolling the wonderful things they have done, run lots of pictures of themselves cutting ribbons, kissing babies and presenting checks. If the news media doesn’t ask questions, and if they never have a serious challenge in an election, chances are they can define themselves on their terms, and voters never get a true picture of the elected official.
However, when there is a serious challenge from another candidate, the elected official, who has always had a free ride, starts to cry ‘foul”. They charge the challenging candidate with being negative, when, in fact, the opponent is merely pointing out things as they are, not the way the elected official wants them to be seen.
The elected official might even say things like “I’m a good person, why are they saying these things about me.” In actuality, the challenger probably hasn’t said anything about the person’s character, but is merely pointing out differences on issues and different attitudes they might have like giving their fulltime position to which they were elected their first priority.
Of course, there are times when campaigns do negative, dirty, despicable things like engaging in character assassinations, calling your opponent a terrorist, questioning their patriotism and conducting a low grade racist campaign. It is even worse when these types of campaigns are conducted at the same time that the country is facing the biggest challenges it has faced in nearly 80 years. It is hard to believe that a candidate or political party would do that, but it has been done. You betcha!
It is ironic when the elected official complains about a “so-called” negative campaign against them, at the same time that his or her party is conducting the kind of contemptible campaign described above. On second thought, maybe that’s not irony, but rather hypocrisy.
But I digress, back to our elected official. When the elected official admits in a newspaper article that they have missed scores of important votes in order to be 100 miles away tending to another taxpayer-funded job, and the challenger points out the double-dipping nature of things, is that being negative or truthful?
When the challenger merely points out differences on issues between the two candidates, is that being negative, or is it informing the voters? After all, shouldn’t the voters know, for instance, that the elected official would take away a woman’s right to choose and would vote to overturn Roe v Wade, while the challenger supports a woman’s right to choose?
Isn’t it informational, rather than negative, to point out that the elected official voted against funding for biomedical research that could unlock the answers to so many diseases and give people longer, healthier lives, while the challenger fully supports that research? It seems to me that the true pro-life position there is finding the cure for so many illnesses.
With so many voters worried about having health insurance or losing it or not being able to afford it, shouldn’t they know that their elected official fought against health care legislation that would have lowered the cost of health care for everyone? And, shouldn’t they know that finding a way to cover Pennsylvania’s 760,000 uninsured persons is the challenger’s highest priority?
With violence at an all time high and Philadelphia police being shot at alarming rates, shouldn’t voters know that the elected official has flip-flopped over and over again on gun control issues, while the challenger would vote for common sense gun control legislation that would make our streets safer and still uphold the basics of the Second Amendment?
And finally, what is so wrong about pointing out that the elected official gleefully campaigned for, sang the praises of, and supported the policies of one of the worst administrations in the history of this country? How can that be negative?
Like many things in life, opinions depend on perspective. One man’s negativity is another man’s truthfulness. I guess it just depends whether you feel you are on the right side of the argument.