Why Us

Mudslinging

Why?

Mudslinging. It’s a popular technique within modern political speech making. Many candidates claim that they will not do mudslinging or attack speeches, but then go ahead and do them anyway. Why will they claim the higher moral ground, and then do the absolute opposite?

It’s because mudslinging is effective. Audiences love anger. Anger breeds passion which leads to engagement. Engagement leads to money, volunteering, propagating the mudslinging, and ultimately, votes.

The implementation of scandalous accusations and insults intended to harm a recipient’s reputation, has been a common tactic in American politics since the late 1700s. It has persisted through history, with each election cycle witnessing its use. But why is mudslinging so effective?

If you are against a candidate, your candidate’s mudslinging will encourage dehumanization of the opposition. It can also divert away from your candidate’s weaknesses.

Your candidate will say something like, “Smith is not a family man.” And then go on to point out some known or even fabricated pieces of evidence. It’ll go so close to libel and slander but remain half breath inside legal territory.

This can pull away from voters looking at your candidate’s two divorces and several affairs. It’s hypocrisy, of course, but it gets the press to talk about the accusations and can sway middle of the road voters.

This can apply to ethical issues, financial wisdom, catering to populations that are typically despised by your candidate’s supporters, etc.

It’s a type of leverage that wedges people from common sense. It leads the voter away from supporting a candidate based on merit, and, instead, works to build hatred against the other candidate.

Good candidates don’t do this, and we won’t write a speech that employs this.

Instead, a candidate should rely on their strengths. They can compare their policies to the opposition’s, but they don’t need to do it with a personal attack. It takes a candidate of great character to avoid this, and it takes voters who are equally strong character to not support a mudslinging candidate.