An observation about a local politcal race

[Kingsmythe]

In the county next to mine, a man named Stan Barry is running for sheriff. I know this because he has signs every five feet on almost every road there. Someone is apparently running against him. I say 'apparently' because i keep seeing signs that say "Drop Stan Barry" and a website. Oddly, I have yet to see any signs for the person running against him.

Now personally, I don't like negative campaigns, and feel more inclined to vote for the other person when I see them on principle. But this just seems wholly ineffective to me. If you're going to bother to put up all the anti- your opponent signs, shouldn't you put up some for you own candidate?

Now, just to be clear, I am not part of either campaign, I can't vote in that election, I'm not registered there. It just seems like both poor planning and negativity taken to new heights (lows?).

Is it just me?

[Flamebird]

It's possible that someone with money doesn't like this "Stan" guy, but isn't actually running for office?
Could be whoever is running against "Stan" doesn't want help from the sign person.
Then again, it could just be a really poor campaigning strategy.

[Morrison_Lad]

It's possible that someone with money doesn't like this "Stan" guy, but isn't actually running for office?
Could be whoever is running against "Stan" doesn't want help from the sign person.
Then again, it could just be a really poor campaigning strategy.

Or a really *good* campaign strategy.

Think about it. You've got Stan, and you've got ... ? You learn that people don't want Stan, you might even learn what bad things Stan has done. But the opponent? Since you have no idea who it is, you don't learn anything bad about him, you don't even have a face to associate with the name.

You show up at the polls on election day, and you know one thing: Stan is bad.

I'm not saying it's necessarily a good strategy, but I can see the thinking behind it, if in fact it is the strategy of the opponent and not, as you say, just someone who doesn't like this Stan character.

ETA: Let me put it another way. How much would the GOP give to be able to go the next year without putting a face and a history to their candidate? How much would they give to just have it be "Obama v Not-Obama?" Granted, that's what they're going to try to do. Unfortunately for them, they have to have an actual candidate.

[RobStaeger]

The Republicans in our town generally don't win. This year, we've received numerous anti-Dem flyers and robocalls, and not once have the Republican candidates' names been mentioned.

[Danimal]

That's become a pretty common strategy - creating groups to campaign against someone as negatively as they like without mentioning the other person's name, thus leaving them disassociated from the claims.