Unverified accusations

 

To the editor:

 

Last week a letter to the editor, attacking me with misinformation and presumption, ran in the Dillon Tribune.

May 9th, on my way to Wisdom, a friend called to inform me of negative campaign materials that she had received. I had picked up the mail before I left home, but had not discovered the materials until her phone call. I stopped in Wisdom to meet voters. At the first home, a voter and I discussed our thoughts on the expansion of Medicaid. I mentioned the campaign flyers of which I just been made aware and my concern they be attributed to me. She hadn’t seen them. At her request I left them with her. By Carl Miles definition, that was a distribution campaign.

I called Carl Miles when I read his letter to the editor (this was the first time I had a conversation with this man). He told me that he has supported Jeff Welborn for a long time. He had little interest in hearing what I had to say. I then called the woman who had taken the flyers from me. She meant no harm to me in giving them to Mr. Miles. Her intent was not malicious, and she is supportive of me.

A candidate is asked how they distinguish themselves from the incumbent. If they didn’t differ on issues, it would be pointless to challenge. Discussing what differentiates is not negative campaigning.

It is a waste of time to defend unverified accusations, and waste of voter time to read about it. This sort of thing serves no purpose other than to divert attention away from the relevant issues.

Brooke Erb

Dillon