With political ads more focused on attacking opponents than providing change, the Northern Star Editorial Board urges readers to demand more of their representatives and to stand up for marginalized groups being exploited.

The 2016 presidential campaigns provided numerous examples of ads aimed to defame the opposing candidate, such as President Donald Trump’s ad, which featured reels of Hillary Clinton stumbling and coughing, attacking her health and ability to lead. While the structure of such ads is not new, the theatrics have escalated, turning political ads and campaigns into a circus.

A prime example is found in Republican gubernatorial candidate Jeanne Ives’ recent ads, which began airing Saturday. The ads display a number of blatant stereotypes targeting marginalized communities, such as immigrants and the transgender community. Exaggerating and caricaturing those communities, the ad is laughable as those portrayed sarcastically thank Gov. Bruce Rauner for making moves to help them.

“It’s more of an attack ad than an issue advocacy ad,” said Cameron Boudreau, sophomore political science major

“I think it’ll suppress Republican voter turnout. It may not affect overall voter turnout, but I think some groups will be affected. Democratic voters might want to go out and vote more now because [Ives] is speaking out against them like that,” said Bouderau.

A social and fiscal conservative, Ives gained negative attention from both the Republican and Democratic parties as a result of the campaign, according to a Saturday Chicago Sun Times article. Political affiliations aside, the ad is just another example of a major shift in politics: campaigns appear to be more concerned with slandering the opponent than with policies and regulations which could potentially begin to repair the economy, among other pressing issues.

These ads do not encourage viewers to go out and participate in the democratic process of voting. Boudreau said if Ives’ goal was to gain any attention whatsoever, she can consider her mission accomplished, operating under the timeless motto that any publicity is good publicity.

The Chicago Tribune wrote an article on Ives’ policies to which she defended her conservative ideals in the same manner the Editorial Board is criticizing — by attacking the enemy. In this case, that enemy was a publication demanding more of political candidates, and the Chicago Tribune ran her letter to the editor on Aug. 12. In her letter, she responded to their previous comments and bit back, just as she does with her most recent ad.

“It seems the intent of your article was to undermine me politically,” Ives wrote. “You apparently seek to destroy my reputation without mentioning the important legislative work I have done.”

Ironically, this is the exact tactic Ives employs in her ad, which attempts to undermine the work Rauner has done, while also trying to defame his name.

While this ad exemplifies the lows hit by political candidates, the Editorial Board encourages readers to go out and vote, as well as to demand more from those representing the state and country.