Some Simple Advice To Campaign Volunteers

Lost In The Weeds:
Is this the message Zach Wamp wants to send?

It’s that time of year, when campaign signs spring up like sunflowers. I’m sure we’ll hear the usual stories about campaign signs getting stolen and I’m sure some blogger will post the usual photo of a dog peeing or pooping on some candidate’s sign. Ha ha hilarious.

Anyway, here’s my pet peeve: I really really hate it when people put campaign signs in the public right-of-way. It looks tacky and trashy and it tells me that you couldn’t find a real person who wanted to show their support for your candidate. On top of which, they end up getting trashed by mowers, traffic and the sun; they always end up looking pretty battered over time and let’s face it, no one ever picks these things up. I mean cripes, I’m still seeing “Who Is Ron Paul” signs on utility poles from two years ago.

So just some friendly advice. If you can’t find a real person who’s proud to support your candidate by putting a campaign sign on their property, maybe you should volunteer for another candidate.


Filed under pet peeves

9 responses to “Some Simple Advice To Campaign Volunteers

  1. Jim

    >Unfortunately just about every campaign puts signs out in the public right of way. There are a few main intersections that are simply covered in signs for every tiny race there is. There should be fines for signs not removed by about three days after the election. And we should be able to opt out of the stupid political calls like we can opt out of the sales calls.Off topic – another government program run with government precision and accuracy:,1773615

  2. >another government program run with government precision and accuracyHaven't clicked thru the story but sense the saracasm in your writing .. and c'mon, give me a freaking break, you just have to look at BP, Goldman Sachs, Enron, Adelphia, etc. etc. etc. etc. to see examples of corporate malfeasance. Forgive me if I'm wrong on your intent, I'm in a bit of a rush …

  3. >In my brother's campaign, we worked pretty diligently to get all of our signs down fairly quickly. We did some "right of way" signing late in the campaign, because people do see them. In this primary, my cousin ran for a position, but he lost in that primary. He immediately sent out emails to his supporters and ask them to take down whatever signs they saw around town. I grabbed a number of them around my neighborhood, but I was driving somewhere just last week and saw a stray one, but didn't have time to stop and get it, but we really do try to get them down.I take the metal rods to a guy who collects scrap who lives in my neighborhood and now that our recycling company has expanded the numbers they'll recycle, I've started putting the signs in with the recycling. I also notice that our Kroger store has expanded what bags they'll take and bags are the same as the #4 plastic on campaign signs.

  4. >Very responsible, Joe!

  5. >local office campaigning is Hard Work, cut them some slack, soBe. it's mostly friends and family putting up and taking down signs. which can really suck, in hot weather states. yes, signs can be better placed. no, not every campaign for district judge or dogcatcher has professional campaign advisors.

  6. >Here in Memphis the election commission has a truck that goes out and checks for this. Signs on city property get a $50 fine.

  7. Jim

    >SB – you are right corporate malfeasance is out of control. assume you are in favor of holding this taxpayer money until it can be proven that this corporate entity is not wasting it.

  8. >No federal money goes to abortion services, Jim. A very small percent of what Planned Parenthood does is abortion related. They are a WOMEN'S HEALTH CLINIC. So few of them out there providing birth control services, STD testing, PAP smears, etc. and right wingers keep attacking them. Shows how hateful conservatives are towards women. And by the way, Planned Parenthood is not a corporate entity. It's a private, non-profit agency ranked as a 4-star charity.Planned Parenthood is a favorite target of the right, and the Washington Times is hardly a credible source (see my post about how they printed a doctored photo of Elena Kagan today). I've searched the GAO sight and see no such report listed. It's possible the Washington Times made this up too. But until I see the actual report, I'm withholding comment.

  9. >I absolutely agree that this is an ineffective way to run a campaign. It actually seems counter-productive, as it is a sure indicator that you couldn't get enough actual people to support your campaign. It also looks plain sloppy and could end up angering more people than it will positively influence. Thanks for this post, a lot of good points here!