OUR VIEW - A clear view of the issues is hard to find

» SUMMARY: Trying to decide whether a candidate is addressing issues or engaging in mudslinging can be very subjective.

Every political season brings with it a new crop of candidates, but the same frustration for voters: Where is the deep discussion of the important issues-

The definition of what constitutes an issue is a fluid one.
The problem seems to be that what the supporters of one candidate consider dealing with an issue, opponents consider simply slinging mud.

Exhibit A this year is the race to succeed Lee Hart as sheriff of Culpeper County.

Supporters of Major Jim Branch point to oversized campaign signs being cut apart to make them legal for town use as being indicative of the deceptive nature of Sgt. Scott Jenkins.

Jenkins' supporters say their candidate merely exhibited a creative problem solving technique that would serve him well as sheriff.

On the other hand, those who back Jenkins accuse Branch of losing his temper at a public forum and thus exhibiting a demeanor unfit for a sheriff. The Branch backers say the audience was stacked with Jenkins supporters purposely trying to goad and annoy Branch and that Branch had a perfect right to expose them.

In an ideal world elections should be decided only on the issues. But we live in the real world and realize that emotions also play a significant role in who votes for whom. In October the Star-Exponent will be running stories based on face-to-face interviews with candidates in all of the contested local races.
We plan to ask questions that provide the answers you want - unobscured by any mud.