Why is Salt Lake City mayoral candidate David Buhler now being critical of his opponent, Ralph Becker? Will it make a difference?

Pignanelli: Negative campaigning is like gossip: Everyone claims to abhor it but readily listens to the juicy stuff. Experienced political analysts concur that negative advertising can secure an election victory — if performed with creativity and strategy (which hasn't happened yet). Buhler is trying to move the undecided voters and former Jenny Wilson supporters to his camp. But his condemnations of Becker are deficient of credibility — and humor. As a former legislator and current two-term councilman, Buhler cannot claim a "fresh face" advantage. Further, Becker and Buhler share the same traits: process-oriented policy wonks who are just nice guys. Buhler ran as such in the primary, and it's too late to adjust his image as a tough administrator. The bottom line is that even a truckload of political mud will not stick to Becker — so why try? Buhler needs to draw distinctions with Becker, but with ingenuity and a colorful approach. Buhler is a dedicated public servant who deserves to walk out of this race with respect and dignity. I hope his advisers remember this.

Webb: A few weeks ago Frank was complaining that this race was the most boring on Earth, and now he's complaining because it's a little spicier. There's a bright line between drawing a contrast with one's opponent and engaging in name-calling and personal attacks (which don't work in Utah). Buhler has not crossed that line. He has criticized Becker's record on crime and other issues but hasn't engaged in the sort of negative campaigning that turns off voters. As the underdog who is behind in the polls, he has to be aggressive and take the fight to Becker. If he did otherwise, he'd be ridiculed by observers like Frank for being too milquetoast.

Why is the voucher movement actually losing support (as noted in a Deseret Morning News poll) for Referendum 1?

Pignanelli: Despite the incredible experience of their campaign staff, the voucher movement has yet to develop and articulate a message that resounds with Utahns. For example, residents of rural areas (bereft of private schools) remain suspicious of the program. Further, voucher opponents are successfully using the traditional tactic of claiming the referendum is plagued with "too many unanswered questions." Voucherites committed the grave political error by forgetting citizens "vote with their wallet." Thus, they have failed create a personal incentive for supporting vouchers. A majority of Utahns (whose children or grandchildren will continue to remain in public schools) are not buying the arguments that state subsidized enrollment of private schools will enhance the quality of education for their families. The question "How do vouchers for private schools drive improvements to public schools?" remains unanswered. Consequently, the poll results are not surprising.