Comments by Santa Clara County Supervisor and Former California State Senator Joe Simitian

Every time we are getting ready to send out a piece of mail or put a piece of content up on the television or on the radio, we ask three questions. It's a 1-2-3. The first question is, is it true? If it's not true, don’t say it. The second question is, is it fair? Sometimes frankly something may be technically true, but not altogether fair. And the third question is, is it relevant? It may be true and it may be fair, but is it really relevant to the race you’re running? If you can't answer yes to all three of those questions, then you really ought to have second thoughts about that message.

As an easy example, suppose someone has been picked up for drunk driving. So is it true? Well okay it's true; they were arrested for drunk driving. Is it fair?

Well, maybe not if it turns out that the breathalyzer was broken. So it may have been true, but not fair. All right, it's true and it's fair, they were arrested for drunk driving, and the breathalyzer is working perfectly fine, and then you have to ask yourself, is it relevant to the campaign? Each campaign and each individual candidate will come to their own conclusion about relevance.

However, if you put the proposed communication through those three questions— is it true, is it fair and is it relevant—then you'll have a pretty good judgment for the most part about whether or not it's appropriate content.

In determining whether a campaign tactic crosses a line, you have to ask yourself a fairly basic question, how would I feel if this tactic were used on me?

That will generate some interesting conversation. The other question that you ought to ask is, do I have people in my campaign circle who are going to help me exercise good judgment? Whenever I've got a campaign committee or kitchen cabinet— whatever you want to call it —I always like to make sure that I have at least one or two people who are the DNP: the “Designated Normal Person.” The Designated Normal Person is someone from outside the day-to-day workings of politics who may even say, “You know, really, you don't want to include me. I don't know that much about politics.” That's exactly the person you want to ask to be your DNP.

Finally, what should you do if your opponent crosses the ethical line? You have to be ready to respond. Thinking you can just sit back and let it wash over you is a mistake.

But in general the response should be rebut and pivot. By rebut I mean correct the information as quickly and effectively as you can. By pivot I mean change the conversation—do not dwell on the misrepresentations that your opponent has put out there in the arena. If your opponent is trying to get folks to think of you in a bad way, belaboring that conversation is probably not the right way to respond. So rebut, be fact-based, and then pivot. Change the conversation to a different topic, either about some good work you've done or, if there's a legitimate critique of your opponent that meets that three-part test, have that conversation if you need to. You can't just sit back and hope for the best. You've got to play an active role in your own defense.