As something of a two decade or so veteran of the campaign wars, signs are near and dear to me personally.
.In my time, I've put up hundreds of them, of all shapes and descriptions, but mostly yard, 2X4 and 4X8 varieties.
.Signs are expensive and take a lot of time, effort and energy. Which is why, when I was working on the Curtis campaign back in 04, I implemented an "any sign, anywhere" policy that resulted in repairing any sign I saw, anywhere I saw it, regardless of the candidate or party.
.Sign damage seems to come in waves and they apply to both sides, more or less equally. Earlier, we saw the efforts made to destroy Ann Rivers' signs; and here's an example of damage that's equal opportunity:
.
.jpg)
I'm given to understand that the source of this defacement is, in fact, a democrat..jpg)
And, it would seem, a Republican is responsible for this effort.
.
This kind of thing really pisses me off.
.
Earlier in the campaign, other's signs were destroyed for whatever the reason.
.
Some damage will occur no matter how carefully put up or safe the sign locations are. Wind, rain, city or county grass cutters... these are the price campaigns pay.
.
But deliberate and willful destruction or defacing signs?
.
There's no place for that in our political system.
.
5 comments:
It truly is sad day. I saw several signs kicked over and there had been no wind in the 49th district. (Of both sides.)
A simple little call to the campaigns and most of the big signs were fixed with a 1/2 hour. And I got very many appreciative thank yous from the campaigns I called. (And no, I am usually traveling and don't have a lot of time to fix every single sign I see down. So a quick call usually takes care of the situation.)
Hey, isn't it about time you did another installed for DinoWatch?
Agreed. I get that some people hate signs. Marvin Case is legendary for his dislike, an odd position given the press's reliance on freedom of speech.
Good or bad, signs ARE speech. They are the speech of the candidate, the speech of their supporters and a part of our most precious right of POLITICAL speech.
Yes, I know that they "clutter" up the landscape, many of them are flat out ugly.
But the RIGHT to display these signs without concern of or for damage to these efforts trumps these concerns of aesthetics.
ALL political persuasions have the right to put these signs up. And those damaging signs, no matter the reason, are attacking the rights of others.
Of course, they don't see it that way because damaging the property of another is a thoughtless act where concern for the time, effort, energy and costs of others has no place.
As for DinoWatch, I haven't been actively updating it because I'm out of that loop and anything else I could come up with is being done by others.
I just wish that there was a Murray Watch, a McMorris Watch, a Reichert Watch, a Gregoire Watch a YouNameIt Watch.
Everyone in elective office should have a "Watch." Everything those who would govern us do or don't do should be cataloged, analyzed and kept in an easy to record and read format, like Russell Watch.
But I'm a one man band and I can't do it all.
Paul Harris put his sign over Hash's sign after the primary when Hash had been eliminated. Paul will also take down all of his signs when the election is over including those he poached after Hash's elimination.
He puts up his opponents signs and any other signs he sees knocked over. He does NOT damage signs.
Yes, you got him Kelly! Paul Harris did put up his sign over Martin Hash's sign AFTER Hash had been eliminated. Paul will also take down the entire sign when the election is over.
Hash did NOT take down his sign and after about 10 days, Paul poached it. This is NOT an incident of a rival messing with someone else's sign. In fact, Paul puts Stoniers signs back up if they are in the vicinity of his own.
Dan, this isn't a matter of "gotcha" politics.
I like Paul Harris. He is, by every measure, the superior candidate and I believe that he will make an outstanding state representative.
But if Hash's signs are up for 10 days or 10 years, they are Hash's signs... not Paul's.
The message I am attempting to send is this: leave other's signs alone. Period.
No matter how long... no matter if the sign in question belongs to a defeated candidate or anyone else.
5 year old 101: if it doesn't belong to you... don't touch it. And that includes "poaching."
Post a Comment