This page is part of an undergraduate assignment at Davidson College.

Defending a Record of Leadership

Throughout the U.S. Senate election in South Dakota, Senator Tom Daschle had to defend the attacks of popular republican challenger, John Thune. While Daschle defined his message as being a powerful member of the U.S. Senate as the minority leader that brought home benefits to South Dakota, the Senator could not ignore the continuous attacks of John Thune that the former had strayed too far from the concerns of South Dakotans. Constantly on the defensive, Daschle had a great trouble convincing South Dakota voters that he had spent tireless effort as minority leader to promote his state (Glazer, “Daschle Weathers,” 2004). Daschle tried to center the campaign on this message, but Thune’s barrage of attacks prevented Daschle from fully illustrating the incumbent’s positive traits.

John Petrocik discusses the nature of campaigns and a candidate’s goal of owning issues. Petrocik’s basic assumption presupposes that the central purpose of a candidate is to move voters’ concerns towards the candidate’s message in order to make a voter’s choice a matter of deciding between two distinct alternatives. By owning a specific issue, a voter can make a clear choice between two candidates that have a different stance on particular issues (Petrocik 1996, 826-828).

In South Dakota, Daschle struggled to place his experience and leadership in the Senate against Thune’s inexperience. In his ad, “Powerful,” Daschle highlights his superior position in the Senate. Daschle made it clear that the voter’s needed to choose between a skillful legislator and a challenger that would merely be a freshman senator. Thus, the fundamental pillar of Daschle’s message was the senator’s status as the democratic minority leader (Glazer, “South Dakota Senate,” 2004).

Daschle focused on other important issues to South Dakota. Daschle’s secondary message encompassed the Senator’s hand in the progress of South Dakota. Ads (“Water,” “Roads”) centered Daschle’s protection of the environment and the promotion of funding for South Dakota water projects (Glazer, “South Dakota Senate,” 2004). The only reason this funding came to South Dakota, Daschle claimed, was a result of the minority leader’s influence and power.

Unfortunately for Senator Daschle, Thune’s negative attacks proved to be more attractive to voters’ interests. Daschle tried to combat the negativity by appealing to voters’ sense of civility. In a number of television ads, Daschle criticized Thune’s negative claims, and Daschle ran a message of respect. In fact, Daschle went so far as to sign an agreement that would have prevented negative ads in the campaign (Glazer, “Chamber, Daschle,” 2004). Hence, the Senator chose to push his message that his experience allowed him to truly help South Dakotans, but he failed to fully define the extent to which he had succeeded.

Home

Political Science 318 - Strategy and Ethics in Election Campaigns