Thus, in this type of positive campaign ads, the presidential candidates would basically promote themselves, their values, image as well as their political propaganda, thereby making a persuasive influence on the voters. However, these candidates could also come up with ads to ‘paint’ their opponents in bad light and they will do that by including negative visuals or sounds involving their opponents, as well as alarming statistical evidences and worst case scenarios. As these campaign ads will make a negative effect on the voters about their opponents, presidential candidates and team are increasingly using these negative ads, especially over the last 30 years, with the media also playing a contributing role in it.
Each presidential campaign from the earliest times have been witnessing changes, and when one looks at the campaigns during the middle decades of the 20th century, it bordered mainly on positivism, good-heartedness as well as balanced approach. These campaigns exhibited that approach by incorporating apt as well as positive visuals and music, and so those campaigns did not hint any negativity. “Campaign ads in the ‘50s, ‘60s, and ‘70s tended to rely more on jingles; they were not as hard-hitting as they are today.” (“Political Mudslinging: Does it Work?”). However, from 1980s till the last elections in 2012, according to political analysts, media and even the public, presidential campaigns have evolved into more of negative campaigns, with negative ads maximally becoming part of those presidential campaigns. This fact was supported by Krupnikov and Easter (100), who stated, “Over the past 30 years, there has been a tremendous increase in the number of negative ads broadcast during American campaigns.” This fact about increasing negative campaign ads was also validated by researches done by political analysts, as they tracked the political