A presidential election riddled with verbal attacks drawing in voters’ attention

Caroline Guthrie, Contributing Writer

Verbal attacks between candidates have been frequent throughout the ongoing presidential election. It seems that every time I use a technological device, I encounter negative messages about a candidate. Whether that entails Donald Trump sending hateful tweets about Hillary Clinton to his 11.2 million followers or Clinton impersonating Trump on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” the immaturity does not seem to end.

Although the negative attacks seem most prominent in this election, they have occurred throughout many presidential campaigns in the past.

“Negative attacks [are] a part of any campaign,” visiting assistant professor of political science Lindsay Nielson said. 

Nielson added that although both candidates verbally attack each other, Clinton’s surrogates tend to speak negatively of Trump on her behalf. According to political science research, negative attacks on other candidates can actually further one’s campaign; verbal attacks capture people’s attention, according to Nielson.

From an entertainment perspective I understand how talking negatively about other candidates draws people in. However, we as American citizens are responsible for voting for the candidate that best represents the individual. It is our duty to be aware of the presidential race and do our part by voting, even if a presidential election lacks popularity due to an absence of hateful comments. That being said, if an entertaining election draws in more serious voters, I am all for it. Despite all the political entertainment in the media, it is important to remember that this is not a reality show. We are choosing the next U.S. president, and we must vote for the candidate who will help the country the most. It is up to us to decide.

(Visited 647 times, 1 visits today)