Find » Politics » Simple Guide to Running a Political...

Simple Guide to Running a Political Smear Campaign

By L. Vincent Poupard, published Jul 24, 2007
Published Content: 501  Total Views: 441,390  Favorited By: 46 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 3.9 of 5
In the past I worked as a political advisor for a corporation. It was sometimes my job to dig up compromising information about the company's enemies. This part of my history has caused me to become a bit of an expert on how to run a political smear campaign. I would like to share some of the techniques with you so that you can point out certain smear strategies in the next Presidential Election.

Basically, there are two types of smear campaigns. They are referred to in the business as solitary or blanket. A solitary smear campaign will take one issue about the person's past, present, or future and exploit it as much as possible. A blanket smear campaign we take multiple issues about the person and exploit them all.

Common issues to be covered during a solitary smear campaign could include infidelity, a past political mistake, a political alliance, a business alliance, or a legal issue that has come up. These issues will be hammered to make sure that people question the judgment of a certain person during current and future issues.

The goal of a solitary smear campaign is to call a person's decision making into question. By being hammered over and over again about the same topic, it will stick for many people. A great example of this would be the number of people that had issues with John Kerry because of the fact that they believed that he flip-flopped on issues. They had been told that John Kerry flip-flopped so many times, that it stuck.

A solitary smear campaign will focus all of the attention to the one issue. It is common, though, that multiple issues can be brought out from the solitary issue. For example, if a person has a political or business alliance with someone who would be considered questionable, all decisions made after that could be suggested as being influenced by the political or business ally.

All of the people involved would then be asked if they really wanted someone in a position of power that would not make the decisions themselves? It would be pushed that this person could not be trusted because of the power and clout of the person's ally.

Simple Guide to Running a Political Smear Campaign

Political smear campaigns are a necessary evil.

Credit: tacojim

Copyright: tacojim

Comments
Comments 1 - 15 of 16
Next >>
 
http://www.squidoo.com/double_speak/

Posted on 08/04/2007 at 8:08:00 PM

 
There are not that many comments in here. I have some articles that have five or six times this. L.

Posted on 07/27/2007 at 11:07:00 AM

 
wow look at all the comments!

Posted on 07/26/2007 at 11:07:00 PM

 
If you pay attention to the article, it states taht the goal of a smear campaign is to find a fact and to exploit it. What most people are familiar with is a detraction campaign. There is a difference. A detraction campaign uses lies to exploit the thought of people. It is completely different. L.

Posted on 07/26/2007 at 8:07:00 PM

 
Yeah, I guess it is a necesarry evil to lead the public to believe lies are facts, such as the common belief that Senator Obama is a Muslim terrorist; and as one person said: an Arab. Smear campaigns are like a husband telling everyone his wife is a whore, to garner sympathy. The husband makes an arse out of himself, because everyone knows the wife is not a whore. People that have nothing positive to offer have to resort to lies to smear their opponent. Which is not the same thing as pointing out facts.

Posted on 07/26/2007 at 8:07:00 PM

 
Let me see if I git it right. I tell about all your bad stuff, the media then tella about my hemroids, the capacity of my bladder, the passion or lack of in my amrriage, and how I comb my hair. Must be another election year.

Posted on 07/26/2007 at 2:07:00 PM

 
Smear campaigns, like that Swift Boat Swiftie idiocy that smeared Kerry in the last presidential race, are basically lies made to look like truth. You can run a good campaign without trying to get the "dirt" on your opponent, and Americans are sick of this kind of sophomorishness employed in state and national campaigns. If you have to stoop to smearing your opponent just to get elected, you don't deserve to hold office. Everybody should be able to run on her own merits, and the public can then choose which merits appeal to them most.

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 6:07:00 PM

 
The "smear campaigns" merely reveal that most politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, are corrupt hypocrites. All political advertising campaigns do little more than provide much annoyance to TV and radio listeners, while cluttering the roadside with meaningless signs. Positive and negative ads are both usually full of exaggerations, false claims, and opportunistic pandering.

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 6:07:00 PM

 
It's not counter-productive to the government and corporate fat-cats. They figure, if they can turn off the majority of voters, which they do every election cycle, they can maintain control and run things the way they want to run them. No accountability, no problem! Love the idea of an essay, Chris!

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 11:07:00 AM

 
And one more thing. Are we not, as humans, allowed to make mistakes?

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 11:07:00 AM

 
Well written. It is strange to see how malleable the general public is. I have never once seen a candidate just lay out his credentials and plan. That is truly what I would like to see. Perhaps we should have the candidates write an essay about themselves and the issues they would like to address. In school you need to prove time and again that you know your stuff. Why not do that for our leaders too? I do not like the "smear" campaign. It makes the job of a voter very difficult. I try to research the candidate and decide from there. Why must we slog through all of the muck too? Most people that I have talked too agree that the mud flinging turns them off. So isn't it counter productive?

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 11:07:00 AM

 
Great article. I dread the upcoming year since it will be full of political mumbo-jumbo. :/

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 11:07:00 AM

 
The problem with calling this a "necessary evil" is that so much of what is said IS NOT TRUE and all the garbage becomes the issue instead of the REAL issues. Modern political campaigns are increasingly nothing but WWE style mud-slinging contests, like the apes at the zoo, only it's not mud that they're throwing. All this does is turn off millions of potential voters to the point that they don't vote, which I sometimes think is the real objective. The more middle class voters sit out, the more influence the fat cats have.

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 9:07:00 AM

 
Interesting take, L.V. And I understand the argument that you need to know the good and the bad about a person, but that only goes so far, in my opinion. I know personally I'd rather have candidates discuss the issues than whether or not someone got an expensive haircut or ditched out on a war. As a result of this "necessary evil," I think we miss out on qualified candidates. And for what? Because his reputation was smeared with things that may or may not even be true. I don't think America will be able to move forward until these negative attack ads are pulled.

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 9:07:00 AM

 
They are. You need to know about the problems with a person if you are going to vote for him or her. The only way to properly get this infomation across is through a smear campaign. L.

Posted on 07/25/2007 at 9:07:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Comments 1 - 15 of 16
Next >>
Advertisment