Contentious Judicial Race in PA Supreme Court Mirrored in Negative Ads
The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court race has become one of the most contentious and negative election battles on television. The two candidates, state Superior Court Judge Daniel McCaffery and Montgomery County Judge Carolyn Carluccio, are both feeling the weight of the negative attacks, claiming that these attack ads distort their true views.
According to Carluccio, the negativity is a disaster for both candidates, stating, One of us is going to be up on that Supreme Court, and we’re both going to be bloodied at that point. McCaffery shares this sentiment, expressing, I am 100 percent appalled by the tenor of this particular campaign and the negative advertising that came about in this particular campaign.
Both candidates attribute the negative ads to special interest groups attempting to influence the election outcome. McCaffery points out that billionaires and corporations are pouring money into the race, with a particular spotlight on the Commonwealth Leaders Fund, which he claims is directly funded by Pennsylvania’s richest billionaire. The fund, however, denies spending as much as claimed and states that it has the support of thousands of contributors.
Carluccio differentiates between the campaigns themselves and the independent groups behind the negative ads. She acknowledges that third-party groups are involved but accuses her opponent of crossing the line in certain ways during interviews. However, she also emphasizes the need for both candidates to rise above the negativity.
The crux of the attack ads revolves around Carluccio allegedly removing pro-life positions from her website and McCaffery’s supposed connection to a past pornographic email scandal involving his brother Seamus. McCaffery denies any involvement in the scandal and mentions that his opponents on the Democratic side retaliated against him. Carluccio clarifies that she never had pro-life language on her website and explains that the changes to her website were a result of hiring new political consultants.
It is evident that the negative ads have created a hostile and tense environment surrounding the Pennsylvania state Supreme Court race. Both candidates express their dissatisfaction with the tone of the campaign and the impact it has on their reputations. As the election draws closer, it remains to be seen how these attack ads will shape the race and the ultimate outcome for the judicial position in the Pennsylvania state Supreme Court.
