Top of the News

Chosen and ranked by Crosscut editors. Click date for previous days.

Mouse over headline for description.

more top of the news

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


Mudville »

Aug 20, 2007 5:00 AM | last updated Aug 20, 2007 2:30 PM
Yard signs

Campaign yard signs from 2005 displayed at the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority.

Advertisement
Advertisement

A puzzle in American politics: If yard signs are such a waste of time, how come people keep doing them?

Despite the protests of campaign experts, candidates and their supporters demand yard signs. It's our Norman Rockwell moment.

By O. Casey Corr

Here's something to consider on Primary Day. If campaign yard signs were votes, Angel Bolanos would be a member of the Seattle City Council.

Two years ago, Bolanos had Seattle covered with yard signs. So did I, but he was the yard sign champ. Neither of us was elected and that illustrates a continuing puzzle in our American political system. If yard signs are such a waste of time, as campaign experts insist, how come people keep doing them? It's a big job pounding signs into August-hardened soil, only to find them torn, stolen or blown over. They cost money, roughly $4 a piece depending on the print run, which diverts donor dollars from what consultants tell you is the smart move: direct mail.

So why do it?

For starters, many of us get warm and fuzzy about yard signs, a display of one's personal commitment to civic life. It's a Norman Rockwell moment, a public and often positive declaration of beliefs. ("Help Kids! Vote Schools"). You're taking a stand. Congratulations.

And yet when I ran for the city council in 2005, I was told not once but probably dozens of times by wise guys of Seattle politics that I was an idiot. Yard signs, they told me, were the obsession of amateurs.

Well, I was an amateur and I wanted yard signs. And if you look around today, you'll see signs for veteran politicians coasting to victory. So they're stupid too? Or maybe, like me, they are responding to demand, especially from family, who want their own yard signs. Don't tell them about your savvy strategy for direct mail -- that's junk, they say. One supporter called me at least once a week about sightings of Bolanos' signs. "He's got at least 10 on Delridge Way. How come you don't? Get somebody out there!"

Abundant yard signs convince people that victory is imminent. The more signs, the more you're gaining ground. ("Hey, I see your yard signs all over town. You're doing great!") And face it, after hours of doorbelling the hills of Ballard, a candidate takes comfort at seeing his signs. I kept a map of Seattle with push pins showing mine. I loved looking at it, but the wise guys said: Get back on the phone. Call for money. Your supporters are already going to vote for you. Don't waste time with mass communications. Identify and reach persuadable voters.

It made sense at some level, but you aren't listening. Isn't that how you decided to do a nutty thing like run for office?

To the casual observer, yard signs look alike. Savvy observers know otherwise.

For openers, you go with a union printer and display that union logo, which is less than a half-inch tall. To do otherwise, at least in Seattle, is political suicide, giving your opponent a talking point for every district Democrat group, connecting you to insensitivity to working families, poverty, a lack of healthcare, and maybe Karl Rove. In 2005, I heard one veteran Democrat bash another who had used an "out of state" print shop. His voice choked with feigned outrage as he revealed that his opponent's signs came from Texas.

Many candidates go with Boruck Printing, a union shop in Seattle's Greenlake neighborhood. Often, they make one of two choices: the old style cardboard and wooden slats or a more modern corrugated plastics and wire stakes.

Take my advice. Forget about the old style. Wood and cardboard signs save money, but they are fragile and go flabby when wet. In 2005, I had a volunteer event where people used electric staplers to assemble the signs, which kept falling apart. So don't do it. Plastic signs look better and the wire stakes go easily into the ground.

Or take the advice from the undisputed king of yard signs, Sen. Ken Jacobsen of northeast Seattle's 46th District. Jacobsen recommends something entirely different,

>a cheap sign that is a thin plastic sack pulled over a wire frame. He raved about how they take up little space in a car and go up fast. No hammer needed. Maria Cantwell and Ron Sims used them in recent elections. They look tacky and raise environmental concerns, but achieve their purpose, getting your name out there.

The next decision is the look and color of your signs. Most candidates go with their own name in simple block letters. Some abbreviate their names. In 2006, Mike McGavick dropped his last name and added an exclamation point: Mike! This year, Venus Velazquez is just Venus. Joe Szwaja is Joe. Sally Clark, a compact name that would please a typesetter, emphasizes her first name. So it's SALLY Clark. Bruce Harrell does the opposite, shrinking his first name. Many candidates like symbols. In 2005, Robert Rosencrantz ran a cartoon of himself in running shorts. Jean Godden goes with a jazzy graphic of the Space Needle angled like a cannon -- doubtless intended as a symbol of her feisty forwardness, or something. Greg Nickels goes with an upright Space Needle. Tom Rasmussen puts the needle behind his full name. Peter Steinbrueck likes to use the clock at the Pike Place Market, where his father gained local fame. A few candidates add slogans. I went with "...for an effective city council," but hardly anyone got that reference to CHECC, the late 1960s city reform group.

After you've ordered signs, the next step is placing them around town, best done overnight by college students in ninja outfits. Some signs go to private homes of supporters; most go to public arterials. I know one campaign manager who studied charts of traffic flows to maximize placements. On Sand Point Way in northeast Seattle, one campaign arranged a cluster of signs that actually extended into the street. That's a no-no, a consequence of energetic volunteers, who in some campaigns make a point of accidentally knocking over the other guy's signs.

Once your signs are out there, be prepared for weird reactions, even with legally placed signs. Some creep in West Seattle like to visit one long stretch of roadway and used a razor to neatly slice everybody's signs, leaving them dangling in halves. (I kept thinking of Hannibal Lector.) At Tully's near Husky Stadium, somebody kept knocking over one of my signs. Every week, I'd restore it but finally gave up when I found it impaled with a stick (like a defeated vampire?) Message received. I wasn't getting that guy's vote.

A day after the election that year, I drove near the University of Washington and spotted one of my signs, arranged with many others on the lawn of the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority.

It's a tradition, nearby frat guys converting campaign refuse, all that advertisement, blather and bravado into something sweet, a bouquet for the sorority women. It's a kind of unity after the election, winners and losers doing their part for an annual campus romance. The politics of hope. I'll vote for that.

  • O. Casey Corr writes the Mudville blog for Crosscut. He is a Seattle-based writer and consultant who previously worked for The Seattle Times and Seattle Post-Intelligencer. He also worked as a senior advisor to Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and ran for Seattle City Council in 2005. You can e-mail him at casey.corr@crosscut.com.
Comments
yard signs are silly
Report a violationPosted by: IMFletch on Aug 17, 2007 6:26 PM
But volunteers and some donors love them. It gives a campaign the illusion of motion. Emphasis on illusion. People can put up yard signs and feel like they're contributing to a campaign, when phones and doorbelling are what wins campaigns, particularly local campaigns.
To sign or not to sign
Report a violationPosted by: J.R. on Aug 20, 2007 1:26 PM
Ask any consultant about yard signs and you'll get the same political cliche: "Signs don't vote." Maybe not, but supporters enjoy posting a candidate's sign in their front yard, so a few signs are on every campaign's "must-have" list (along with the obligatory T-shirts and buttons). As for the tactic of posting dozens of yard signs on public rights of way in an attempt to boost name recognition--it doesn't work. My proof? The last three candidates to run exhaustive yard sign blitzes on public property were Lynne Dodson (lost her primary race for 43rd Dist. rep.), David Irons (lost big in the last King County exec's race), and Lauren Briel, current City Council longshot, who has plenty of signs everywhere you look, but probably won't get enough votes tomorrow to make the final.
Great Typo
Report a violationPosted by: Andrew_Taylor on Aug 20, 2007 1:32 PM
Abundant yard signs convince people that victory is eminent.

Eminent: high in station, rank, or repute; prominent; distinguished: eminent statesmen.

Imminent: likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.

What a wonderful example of a mala-spellcheckism!

BTW: Yard Signs on public property say to me: "This candidate is a loser: can't get private citizens to display their signs".

Andrew

PS: Candidates: take em down after the election!
Eminent typo
Report a violationPosted by: CaseyCorr on Aug 20, 2007 2:36 PM
Crosscut WriterI fixed the typo spotted by Andrew_Taylor. --Casey
Posting on Public Property
Report a violationPosted by: dltooley on Aug 20, 2007 4:24 PM
FWIW I don't think it is legal to post signs on public property. I wonder how many public property yard sign posters have gone on to vote against grafitti or to regulate billboards.

That said, I think they do have an effect and would like to see some backup on those so-called 'experts' who say they don't. Private signs can have a more positive impact, but then, if you don't happen to like the poster...

But then I've always wanted to to submit electeds and staff to random drug testing - the same standard we hold our truck drivers to. Fat chance of that!

As to public signs, I've pulled down a few of people I don't like. Your stories of the more creative treatments of public signs are inspiring...

-Doug
Tacoma
Signs of the season...
Report a violationPosted by: Piper Scott on Aug 21, 2007 7:48 AM
Crosscut WriterI love political campaign signs! They're a good old-fashioned symbol of the vibrancy of democracty, and they help out in the garden (more on this in a moment).

While it's true that personal contact in the form of doorbelling and direct mail are more effective in getting the attention of individual voters, campaign signs are one of those things that if you don't do them, people will wonder if you're really serious about running for office; signs are expected of you, and when you don't do the expected, you're not expected to win.

Campaign signs add needed color, both literal and figurative, in the fall. As the weather turns, skies get suicidally overcast, flowers die off, and leaves fall, the kaleidescope color riot of campaign signs brighten the landscape, Lady Bird Johnson notwithstanding. They're fun to look at!

Of course, cheesy looking signs do a campaign more harm than good. Right now in Woodinville, where there are several hotly contested city council races, signs are cropping up all over. Some, however, look like they were designed by the terminally esthetically challenged. If your signs look cheap and cheesy, voters will regard you as cheap and cheesy.

In the last general election, a kerfuffle over campaign signs and their removal proved that political parties and candidates still take them seriously. In what was not my party's finest hour, signs disparaging an elected official friend of mine were strategically placed next to her signs. The removal of the naughty signs sparked a minor brouhaha that actually added luster to my friend's name and brought free publicity to her campaign. Backfire city!

My yard is always festooned with signs, and such festoonment then becomes the target of both the common, run-of-the-mill vandal and his more scurrilous and dastardly cousin, the ideological vandal.

Teens and others in the neighborhood who uproot my yard's campaign signs can be forgiven. I was there once myself. But those who target, whether on my property or elsewhere, only signs for candidates or issues they oppose deserve a special place in hell where they would be consigned to watch political TV ads for all eternity.

Signs are free speech, and selectively removing them is dirty-trick censorship. Shame on whoever does it! It got so bad in the last presidential campaign that I was forced to staple my huge Bush/Cheney signs on the second story of the house.

It's after the election that signs take on an eternal life. Disassembled, with the corregated plastic sign saved as either a souvenir or until the next campaign (no candidate I know still uses paper signs!), the self-tapping screws go in a tub increasingly full of them for my own future use, and the wooden stakes are saved until spring and use in the garden. Dahlias and tomato cages are very bi-partisan in their appreciation for the support. My nod to recycling...

And it's indicative of the character of a candidate how quickly after an election are signs removed. One perennial candidate now running in his 11th or 12th soon-to-fail campaign (after switching parties from mine to the other...good riddance!) generally leaves many of his signs up reminding all of us why we wouldn't vote for him even if he were the only candidate running.

Signs are good...I love signs...Sign makers are people, too, and their kids have to eat!

The Piper
campaign circus
Report a violationPosted by: LoveYourViaduct on Aug 26, 2007 10:08 AM
Are you kidding? What would campaigns be without signs? They're just anothe facet of the circus atmosphere surrounding political campaigns. The faithful need something to rally around. Not that there aren't drawbacks ...

Like those people who wave the signs at intersections? I've seen a couple of accidents where drivers were watching the signs instead of traffic. Then the removal of opponents signs, or the mass transplantion of one candidate's signs to the opponents front yard. Or the guy with access to a cherry picker installing signs all over the countryside to join the Tiny's of Cashmere and Believe in the Lord permasigns ... Or modifying the message, like what I saw on the Olympic Peninsula one time - signs for Norm Dicks were modified to read Norms ... Well, you get the idea.

Nope, campaign signs are free speech at its freeest. Love 'em or hate 'em, they're not going away. But I DO wish the people who are so enthusiastic about putting them up would remove them a little more promptly after the election. They aren't exactly fine art, you know.
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign up for Crosscut's free weekday newsletter e-mail.
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Crosscut »
Crosscut Seattle is an online newspaper for the Pacific Northwest, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news.

• More about Crosscut

Contact Crosscut

Tools

Sign up for Crosscut's daily newsletter
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement


Advertisement


Advertisement