There is a lot of commentary on social media regarding the perception by some about negative campaigning in the mayor's race. What is "factual" to one group is "negative" to another group. For the most part, both campaigns have put out mail highlighting their records and positions.

But we have had a comparison of missed votes by the candidates, and Laura skipping the candidate debates. Laura defends that she was taking care of her sick mother, had a car accident, and most recently, a family emergency. Maureen defends that she was recovering from surgery for lung cancer. Maureen has been called "full of it" and a "lier" while Laura has been answering a suggestion that she has promised appointment to her seat on city council if she becomes Mayor.

But none of this is new this year. Nor is it new to Livonia.

In 1969, Mayor Harvey Moelke was on the receiving end of fact based campaign literature put out by supporters of Ed McNamara. There was a picture of the house Moelke lived in and included the assessed value and amount of taxes paid. Next to it was a picture of the house McNamara lived in with the same information. The reader was left to conclude that Mayor Moelke was paying less than his share of taxes compared to candidate McNamara. 

McNamara won. Did this campaign flyer make a difference?

In 1995, Councilman Dale Jurcisin was running neck and neck against Jack Kirksey when a mailer hit the mail boxes the weekend before the election claiming that the Ardmore Psychiatric Hospital on Farmington Road north of 7 Mile was going to be turned into group housing with residents from Detroit, all orchestrated by County Executive McNamara and his lieutenant Jurcisin.

Kirksey won. Did this campaign flyer make a difference?

In 2007, Councilwoman Maureen Miller Brosnan ran against Jack Kirksey and she won the primary election. At the end of the general campaign an anti-Brosnan mailer arrived with a picture of Kwame Kilpatrick leaving an airplane with money flying out of his pockets, suggesting that Livonia and Brosnan would somehow be controlled by Detroit.

Kirksey won. Did this campaign flyer make a difference?

A few years ago in a campaign for re-election to the City Council, Tom Robinson was the recipient of such negative campaign literature that he and his wife, a member of the Livonia Board of Education, moved out of town and have not been heard of since. His crime? He was undergoing a kidney transplant and accepted city health insurance. Without the transplant he surely would have died. But this did not stop the opposition from sending out a letter from Jack Kirksey that was devastating to Robinson, suggesting that somehow he did something improper.

Robinson lost. Did this letter make a difference? 

So, with a view to the past, "negative" campaigning has been with us, and often has been shown to be effective.  The essential question is: are the attacks in the current campaign based on documented fact, or are they unsupported and primarily personal characterizations?