The Art of the Integrity-Based Political Attack
By Tom Speaks
In my last article, I examined why many Northeast Ohio candidates create and distribute negative campaign ads and hateful literature that personally attack their opponents. I asserted that recent political trends demonstrate how counterproductive it is to run a negative campaign using a personal attack. This type of campaigning will harm the individual initiating the attack more than the intended target.
In this, the second article of the series, I explain the necessity of a hard-hitting political attack and the technique for its implementation, not on a personal level, but on the opponent’s professional record or political platform.
A spirited attack on an opponent’s professional record and political platform, if prosecuted without delving into personal matters, is fair game. In fact, it is an absolute necessity for the continuation of a vibrant democracy. An integrity-based political attack is an essential component of a healthy debate.
The Roots of the American Integrity-Based Political Attack
As asserted above, an integrity-based political attack is a foundational element of our democracy. It is as American as mom and apple pie.
The pantheon of our nation’s founding fathers is familiar to us all: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison and many others who, through their achievements, have become immortal. Although these towering intellects were often fierce ideological and political opponents, they refrained from engaging in personal attacks. Code Duello, the gentlemen’s code, did not permit political figures of that period to engage in personal attacks. Although one was free to attack another’s political position or platform with passion and vigor, one was never permitted to attack on a personal level.
Amazingly, there is only one documented instance of a personal political attack among the founding fathers. It was the infamous conflict between Raymond Burr and Alexander Hamilton. Raymond Burr believed that Alexander Hamilton had made a series of personal attacks against him over many years. In a complex and lengthy correspondence that steadily escalated between the two men, Burr finally challenged Hamilton to the fateful duel in which Hamilton was mortally wounded. This duel is historically significant because it is the only example of a debate among the founding fathers spiraling into violence.
The founding fathers understood the necessity of a vibrant, honest and occasionally brutal political debate. A study of their correspondence reveals that they mercilessly attacked each other’s ideas and political philosophies. In the spirit of a healthy debate, this was a noble and honorable undertaking. It is also evident that they understood the corrosive and destructive nature of combative politics based solely upon hateful personal matters. Thus the founding fathers practiced self-restraint and did not engage in reprehensible political behavior. Many scholars agree that their collective ability to refrain from this hateful behavior and achieve meaningful compromise, permitted them to do the impossible: to declare independence from the world’s most powerful empire in order to establish a free nation based upon the revolutionary concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the common individual.
The founding fathers utilized the integrity-based political attack as an essential political tool in the establishment of our nation.
The Art of the Integrity-Based Political Attack
How do you conduct an effective integrity-based political attack?
First, make the determination that as a candidate with integrity, you will not engage in hateful and counterproductive personal attacks against your opponent. Most candidates select integrity as a prominent self-description word for their own campaign literature. If you are going to publicly claim this noble trait, exemplify it.
Second, as the candidate, you must understand the necessity of a vigorous and relentless attack upon your opponent’s political position. It is absolutely critical that you set the tone and pace of your political race.
To do this, you must continuously do two things:
- Attack – Attack – Attack… with integrity
- Frame the debate
ATTACK–ATTACK–ATTACK
Several illustrative examples of the type of attack that is necessary in a campaign can be found in football, chess and war.
Football: Think of the concept behind the two-minute offense in a football game. When utilizing this aggressive football strategy, the offense does not take the time for a huddle in between plays. They simply rush to the line of scrimmage and immediately begin the next play. The offense relentlessly advances forward and never allows the defense to rest or regroup. Most importantly, because this two-minute offense forces the opposition to constantly react to its movements and strategy, the defense is continually off balance.
Chess: To win in a high-level chess match, it is imperative that you quickly obtain dominant positions on the chess board and then vigorously attack. To win, you must force your opponent, with each and every move, to constantly react to your movements. This aggressive strategy obstructs your opponent’s ability to mount an effective attack upon you.
War: In conventional warfare, it is prudent to attack your enemy where they are weakest while bypassing fortified strong points. The attacking military unit has momentum and, flexibility while the military unit on the defense is stagnant and essentially, a target. By pressing forward with an unrelenting attack, you will force the defender to constantly react to your plans, which places them at a tremendous disadvantage.
Politics: The parallels between the three previous examples and a modern American political campaign are evident. As the candidate, you must conduct an aggressive and hard-hitting campaign that forces your opponent to constantly react to your movements.
Contemporary political pundits often use the colorfully abrasive phrase, “It is difficult for your opponent to respond if your fist is in his mouth.” Although this belligerent phrase may make your pastor, rabbi or spiritual advisor blush, if applied as an integrity-based political attack, it is wise advice. Thus, step one is to understand the importance of the aggressive attack that keeps your opponent reeling and reacting.
Now that you understand the conceptual necessity of the political attack, how can you accomplish it in practical terms? How can you, as the candidate, set the tone and pace of your race?
FRAME THE DEBATE
The candidate who successfully frames the debate will win.
As a practical example, I recently managed a very contentious Northeast Ohio mayoral race that resulted in victory. In that race, our candidate possessed an overwhelmingly impressive professional financial record. However, our candidate’s weakness was that he possessed no governmental experience as an elected official. The opponent had been a city council member for many years and had served as council president and chairman of various committees. He also received the most votes in the previous city council election. His financial credentials, however, were quite weak when compared to our candidate. Intelligence that was gathered early in the campaign demonstrated conclusively that a strong financial background was a critical attribute desired by the constituency.
With this knowledge, we framed the debate. With great effort and message discipline, we framed the debate by forcing the primary theme to be financial experience. We began our offensive very early in the campaign. We created comparative pieces that visually and clearly demonstrated the executive financial experience of our candidate and the opponent’s extreme lack of financial experience. We submitted newspaper advertisements, sent mailers, distributed literature door-to-door, created candidate and volunteer speaking points, ran TV spots, established a web site, etc. All of these efforts focused on the financial experience message. Bottom line: our candidate had the financial experience, the opposition did not.
This financial message was the issue-centered (non-personal) theme that was used as our integrity-based attack. We drove this message home with a relentless barrage of truthful, easy-to-comprehend information. When the opposition attempted to drive different campaign messages, he was unable to achieve any traction. Due to our framing of the debate, the primary voter question of the campaign became, “Which candidate has the financial experience to manage this city?”
When the opponent began to utilize his finite resources to demonstrate that he was also an experienced financial manager, we knew we had him. At that point, the race was over! Call in the dogs and put out the fire! He was responding to our message and engaging in a debate that he could not hope to win. We needed to continue the application of relentless pressure as exemplified in the earlier football, chess and warfare analogies.
We had framed the debate around an extreme strength of our candidate and a profound weakness of our opponent. We had seized the momentum and had continuously driven our message forward. We had forced the opposition to react to our message and dance to our song.
If you want to win your political race, you must first frame the debate. Then, by using the integrity-based attack, relentlessly pressure your opponent into reacting to your message.
As a candidate you must perform a critical self-assessment. Where are your strengths and weaknesses? You must also assess the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent. How do they compare? Where is your advantage? Seize upon that advantage and create a powerful message to frame the debate. Then, drive that message home with your integrity-based attack.
Remember that democracy can often be a tumultuous, smash-mouth affair. Bold ideas thrust forward by passionate and spirited individuals are destined to clash ferociously with opposing points of view. This is positive! Steel sharpens steel! We will be a better democratic society and a stronger region due to these debates. We wish all Northeast Ohio candidates and elected officials the very best in your political races. Those of you with the courage to step into the ring of public service are the future of our vibrant, participatory democracy. Thank you for all you do. For the benefit of all Northeast Ohio residents, we sincerely hope you will keep it clean, honest and above all, keep up the good fight. NEO
