Political mailings are copy-and-paste mud slinging
Editor:
I am a registered voter, and I take the time to listen to the candidates, understand the issues and inform myself so that I can make educated choices in the voting booth. I do not consider myself either Republican or Democrat. I consider myself an American citizen.
I was surprised, but just laughed at the flap over which candidate is "really" behind the Second Amendment. Things have been taken out of context and brandished about. I really don't see that many people will take too seriously the obviously wounded pride of someone who seems to think that duck hunters aren't in favor of the right to bear arms. Does he think hunters plan to shoot ducks and other game with a sling shot? Most hunters I know take very seriously their right to protect their families as well as to hunt. I think Dana Sapp Seidel stated her position very clearly in her letter to the editor (Sept. 21) — with no photo attached that I could see. You'd think some people would be happy both candidates are in favor of the Second Amendment.
The next event was the mailed cards introducing the candidates to the potential voters. I do read these cards and see what the candidates are publicly declaring as important. I think they are important whether they are from Democratic or Republican candidates. Was I ever surprised to learn that three candidates believe and offer exactly the same thing — literally word-for-word except for the candidate's name. Does that make me believe these candidates are really free-thinkers (or voters)? Did you really think we wouldn't notice that they all "think" the same thing? Remember these same people, if elected, will be representing all of us with their votes, not just those who voted for them. Will the same people who are responsible for campaign cards that are identical be telling these candidates how they must vote as well?
Finally, I couldn't believe my eyes when I started to read the cards about Bob Bergren, Jack Threthewey and Dana Sapp Seidel, and they turned out to be mud-slinging messages from the opposing camp. I was absolutely appalled at such underhanded tactics. By the way, again they were verbatim; apparently all candidates have committed exactly the same sins.
I have made it a point to meet all the candidates and listen to them. I have never heard Bergren, Seidel or Trethewey say a negative thing about their opponents. They stick to letting the constituents know what they have to offer and comparing differences. Then it is about choice: Do you want what I offer to represent you or are your ideals with the opponents?
No mud slinging, just facts.
Do some candidates have so little to offer that they need a writer to copy-paste their cards and then resort to plain dirty behavior to win the election? It shows me where the real values lie and who is not afraid to think for themselves. Please follow me in backing Bob Bergren, Dana Sapp Seidel and Jack Trethewey at the polls. We know they are not being scripted behind the scenes.
Ursula Brese
Havre
I am a registered voter, and I take the time to listen to the candidates, understand the issues and inform myself so that I can make educated choices in the voting booth. I do not consider myself either Republican or Democrat. I consider myself an American citizen.
I was surprised, but just laughed at the flap over which candidate is "really" behind the Second Amendment. Things have been taken out of context and brandished about. I really don't see that many people will take too seriously the obviously wounded pride of someone who seems to think that duck hunters aren't in favor of the right to bear arms. Does he think hunters plan to shoot ducks and other game with a sling shot? Most hunters I know take very seriously their right to protect their families as well as to hunt. I think Dana Sapp Seidel stated her position very clearly in her letter to the editor (Sept. 21) — with no photo attached that I could see. You'd think some people would be happy both candidates are in favor of the Second Amendment.
The next event was the mailed cards introducing the candidates to the potential voters. I do read these cards and see what the candidates are publicly declaring as important. I think they are important whether they are from Democratic or Republican candidates. Was I ever surprised to learn that three candidates believe and offer exactly the same thing — literally word-for-word except for the candidate's name. Does that make me believe these candidates are really free-thinkers (or voters)? Did you really think we wouldn't notice that they all "think" the same thing? Remember these same people, if elected, will be representing all of us with their votes, not just those who voted for them. Will the same people who are responsible for campaign cards that are identical be telling these candidates how they must vote as well?
Finally, I couldn't believe my eyes when I started to read the cards about Bob Bergren, Jack Threthewey and Dana Sapp Seidel, and they turned out to be mud-slinging messages from the opposing camp. I was absolutely appalled at such underhanded tactics. By the way, again they were verbatim; apparently all candidates have committed exactly the same sins.
I have made it a point to meet all the candidates and listen to them. I have never heard Bergren, Seidel or Trethewey say a negative thing about their opponents. They stick to letting the constituents know what they have to offer and comparing differences. Then it is about choice: Do you want what I offer to represent you or are your ideals with the opponents?
No mud slinging, just facts.
Do some candidates have so little to offer that they need a writer to copy-paste their cards and then resort to plain dirty behavior to win the election? It shows me where the real values lie and who is not afraid to think for themselves. Please follow me in backing Bob Bergren, Dana Sapp Seidel and Jack Trethewey at the polls. We know they are not being scripted behind the scenes.
Ursula Brese
Havre
