What the hell are they hiding?
Have you noticed politicians aren’t mentioning
party affiliation? You’ve got to Google them if you want to know if they’re a
Democrat or Republican.
They want your vote.
They’ll tell you about their kids, their military
service, their hometown, and the job their grandpa had. But the party? Somehow,
that little detail gets lost between the family photo and the promise to fight
for Iowa.
What the hell? You’re applying for a job making
decisions with our money. Can we get the basic information without conducting a
background search?
Watch the pitch.
There’s a barn, a handshake, someone walking
through a field. And maybe an American flag. They believe in families, hard
work, and common sense. Good to know. Who doesn’t?
The likely explanation is pretty simple.
A party label can make people stop listening. Leave it out, and the candidate gets a chance to be the friendly person from down the road before becoming another Democrat or Republican you’re already mad at.
That’s the pitch.
Hear me out before you decide you hate my team. Fair enough. But how much information gets pushed aside to keep that introduction pleasant?
Not every missing label means somebody’s hiding something. A yard sign is a small advertisement, and there’s no statewide count here proving party names are disappearing.
What we have are candidates trying to make their identities bigger than their party’s. Nothing wrong with that.
Take Rob Sand, the Democrat running for governor. His ad, “Stealing is Bad,” emphasized his work prosecuting corruption and finding misspent public money. That’s an easy doorway into the conversation. Who can argue that stealing tax dollars is good?
The appeal works without selling viewers on the Democratic Party. You can dislike Democrats and still want somebody watching the books. For a Democrat trying to win Iowa, that could be the difference between winning and losing.
Republican nominee, Zach Lahn, talked about schools, clean water, family farms, and keeping young people in Iowa. He criticized partisanship, saying both sides shared responsibility for the problems.
Are those complaints sincere?
They might be. They’re also useful campaign messages. A voter fed up with both parties could be more willing to listen to somebody promising to take on the mess than somebody defending the people who made it.
And then there’s Ashley Hinson, the Republican running for the U.S. Senate. Her September ad, “Squeezed,” talks about rising prices, drug costs, and working with both parties. She calls herself a “bipartisan fighter.” Someone who’ll help with the bills. How much does the party matter once the voting starts?
Josh Turek, her Democratic opponent, sells his own story. In his ad, “Seventy Three,” he talks about growing up wearing Goodwill hand-me-downs and being a working-class kid in a blue-collar town. He promises to take on Trump and anyone else in Washington. The appeal is pretty clear. I know what getting squeezed feels like. I’ve lived it.
Neither one’s politics is impossible to find. Hinson’s earlier ad, “Believe,” talked about working with Trump. Turek’s ad attacked him. But listen to what they’re asking you to buy: the bipartisan fighter, the working-class outsider.
What the hell happens when those promises run into a party-line vote?
For Democrats, look at the numbers. Donald Trump got 927,019 Iowa votes in 2024, accounting for 55.73 percent of ballots cast. A Democrat needs some of them to cross over if he wants to win.
How do you get them?
You give them something to consider besides the party name. Maybe it’s your record, a hospital they’re worried about losing, or a tax bill they can’t afford. You try to make the election about a problem they want solved.
Iowa Republican Joe Mitchell removed MAGA language from his campaign website. It doesn’t mean his beliefs changed. Which raises another question: what are voters supposed to make of the stuff that disappears?
Campaigns have different audiences to satisfy.
In a primary, you’re asking voters to choose their party’s nominee. In November, you need a wider crowd. Some want a fighter. Others are sick of the fighting. Good luck making a commercial that keeps everybody happy.
Then there’s the sign beside the road. It has a name, an office, and maybe a slogan. Leaving off the party could be strategy, design, or an assumption that you already know.
But that still leaves the voter wondering. Why is the candidate’s name worth printing in letters a foot high while the party requires a separate search?
And the “paid for by” line won’t necessarily settle it. Iowa’s ethics board explains that attribution identifies who pays for political material. It also exempts campaign signs of 32 square feet or less erected on land from that requirement. Sponsorship disclosure doesn’t turn a sign into a complete account of somebody’s politics.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting people to hear you out.
A party label can flatten a person into every lousy thing somebody else in the party has done. Candidates deserve a chance to explain themselves. Voters deserve an explanation with some meat on it.
“Independent-minded” sounds nice.
What does it mean when there’s a vote? Which party proposal would you oppose? What have you already opposed? Give us something we can check besides your affection for Iowa, because eventually the campaign ends.
The smiling person beside the barn gets an office, a budget, and decisions to make. That’s when we find out how much of the independence survives contact with party leadership.
So what the hell are they hiding?
Sometimes, probably nothing more than a label they think might cost them a hearing. Sometimes the omission leaves questions the cheerful ad never gets around to answering.
They’ve told us they love Iowa. Fine. Now tell us who you’re with, what you stand for, and where you’ll draw the line. We shouldn’t need Google to finish the introduction.
In the end, it doesn’t matter whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican. What matters is that the rules of the game have changed. And it’s harder to tell who’s who.
Before you go...
If you’ve ever stayed up way too late watching a true crime
documentary, gone down a rabbit hole reading about an unsolved murder, or found
yourself saying, “How have I never heard this case before?”—you’re
in the right place.
I dig into murders, disappearances, serial killers, cold
cases, small-town mysteries, forgotten crimes, and the strange, unsettling
stories that time almost erased. No sensationalized headlines. No made-up
drama. Just well-researched stories built from newspaper archives, court
records, police reports, and historical documents.
If you enjoy what you read and would like to help keep the
lights on, consider buying me a Big Gulp.
Every little bit helps pay for old newspapers, research
materials, public records, travel, and the countless hours spent piecing
together stories that deserve to be remembered.
Buy Me a Big Gulp / NickVulich.com
If true crime is your thing, you might also enjoy these
books...
No comments:
Post a Comment