Tully Misses the Mark ... Again, Suggests Kennedy Follow Fool-Hardy Campaign Strategy

Indianapolis Star columnist Matthew Tully pens a column today suggesting that Melina Kennedy is doing something wrong by going negative, i.e. pointing out Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard's record.

Indianapolis Star Columnist
Matthew Tully

From a campaign perspective, Tully could not be more wrong.  It would have been extremely irresponsible of Kennedy to not point out why people shouldn't vote for Ballard. After all, the election is a referendum on Ballard. The problem is not that Kennedy has been "negative," the problem is she hasn't been nearly as aggressive as she should have been in attacking Ballard's record.  For example, Kennedy should be going after the parking meter deal, the Pacer deal, etc. Instead she only will address Ballard's persistent corporate welfare giveaways very generally.   Giving the populist, anti-corporate tide sweeping the country, Kennedy has (had?) a perfect opportunity to decry Ballard's turning over his administration to profiteers.

I don't like that term "negative" campaigning. It implies you're doing something wrong when you're doing what you're supposed to do as a candidate. The question is whether the attacks are accurate and whether personal issues are avoided.   For the most part, I think the overwhelming answer as to Kennedy's campaign is "yes." It's not like she pulled the stunt that was pulled on behalf of Kostas Poulakidas against Councilor Christine Scales, the fake postcard from Florida.  Now that is gutter politics.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised about Tully.  He has not uttered one words against the pay-to-play culture of Indianapolis politics and decries anyone who even raises the subject.  In his column he talks about how great deputy Mayor Mike Huber is.  Huber was the architect of one of the most lopsided deals in Indianapolis history, the parking meter contract which will result in the giving away of 70% of our parking revenue for the next 50 years.  Just because Huber is good at convincing councilors to sign off on sweetheart, corporate welfare deals that screw over taxpayers and mortgage the future of this City does not mean he warrants praise.  After all, wasn't Al Capone good at his job too?

If Kennedy loses it won't be because she went "negative" (like Ballard hasn't been negative?) but because she failed to be aggressive enough in pointing out how Ballard turned his back on the people and the populist values he campaigned on in 2007.