As the presidential campaign begins to heats up, a barrage of television ads and aggressive campaigning has prompted concerns among many that the race is taking on an increasingly negative tone early on.
“Both candidates are hoping to shape perceptions of the race,” University of Wisconsin political science professor Charles Franklin said. “They’re hoping to set the agenda by doing it now.”
Recent Bush ads have labeled Kerry a security threat for the country, while Kerry has been quoted calling Republicans “lying” and “crooked.”
Bush also charged Kerry with planning to raise taxes by $9 billion, a claim Kerry quickly refuted in a commercial where the narrator asks, “Doesn’t America deserve more from its president than misleading, negative ads?”
In the 2000 election, campaign ads did not start airing until June and direct-attack ads did not surface until August. Yet in this year’s race, voters have already seen both.
“This is an unusually early start to the general election,” Franklin said. “Before, it started nearer to the conventions. But this time, the moment the nominee was determined it starts.”
Don Eggert, co-chair of Students for Kerry, attributed the campaign’s aggressive start to the Bush administration’s actions.
“A big part of the dynamic right now is that George W. Bush has really divided the country. A lot of people are upset, so there are strong views on either side,” he said.
But Frank Hennick, co-chair of Students for Bush, feels the intense campaigning is the result of the significance of the race.
“It underlines the importance of the election,” Hennick said, adding the attacks so far have not been a radical departure from what is expected in a presidential election.
Franklin, however, addressed the possibility of alienating voters through negative campaigning.
“It will have to do with the nature of the negativity. If it comes in the form of a policy debate, then it will actually help voters become better-informed,” he said, but added an increasing number of personal attacks produces, “more alienation and less information.”
Hennick maintained that the dynamic of the campaign will only serve to inform more Americans, saying it, “puts presidential politics on peoples’ minds earlier.”
Franklin was more cautious of the effects on voters.
“This is the first time both candidates have the money to be airing lots of ads at an early stage. We don’t know if voters will be burned out by fall,” Franklin said.
Since Wisconsin was one of the top three states with the narrowest margin between Bush and Gore in the 2000 election, citizens can expect no slow down in the surge of campaign ads.
With so many unprecedented characteristics, Eggert said it is hard to determine the outcome of the election.
“This is going to be a really hard election to predict. Bush has raised so much money, the Democrats are more united than ever, the primary was resolved so early,” he said. “This all makes this campaign a little bit different.”