You’d think an incumbent running for re-election would broadcast his or her accomplishments from past term. Things like district-popular bills voted for (YEA), district-disliked bills voted against (NAY), sponsored bills to cut spending and reduce our national debt, and specific actions and votes intended to slow or stop the unconstitutional rampage by the socialist-leaning White House.
If the incumbent’s record of accomplishment is sparse, you’d think he or she would, at least, make promises for big things, if only the voters would stick with him or her for another term.
But, no! An incumbent with power and longevity threatened is like a wild wolverine backed into a corner — it’s going to attack. Not surprisingly then, we hear attack ads making allegations and slamming incumbents’ challengers.
Unless we each diligently research those allegations, we won’t really know if any have validity. What we do know is incumbents are attacking their challengers with a vengeance. They are trying to shift the discussion from their records to the credentials of their challengers.
Why would that be? Could it be because the records of many incumbents are nothing to write home about? And could it be because their overall voting records do not reflect the will of the people in their areas of representation?
So, barring a list of accomplishments, what is the best strategy for incumbents? Divert attention from themselves. Make the campaign all about others — their challengers.
Let’s do the same. Let’s look at challengers, and each of us vote May 24 for the challengers we think best qualified to serve us at the state and federal levels.
Send a letter to the editor or email firstname.lastname@example.org