Dignity in Congressional Races

 

Panelist Comments Support a Dignity Strategy

UNITE, the non-profit founded by Tim Shriver to ease the country’s political divisions, today released its Dignity Index scores on candidates for the US House and Senate.

“The scores this week show that panelists recognize the presence of dignity or contempt whether they agree with the speaker or not,” said Shriver, a co-creator of the Index. “And the comments support the view that a “dignity strategy” – searching for common interests and values, for example – can be much more appealing to voters than a contempt strategy, which demonizes opponents to energize supporters.”

In one passage, Republican Senate candidate Larry Hogan said of his opponent: “I like and respect Angela Alsobrooks. We got a chance to work together while I was Governor, we accomplished a great deal together… and she's got a great life story.”

This prompted a panelist on the right to say, “I am ranking this as a six because he is speaking so highly of his opponent at a time when he would be expected to call her an evil witch instead. It does take some political courage to speak highly of the person you are running against.” This passage also prompted a panelist on the left to say, “I wish more candidates did this. I would do it myself if I ran for public office.”

In another passage, Republican House candidate Lauren Boebert opened a rally by saying: "I was gonna kick things off with a joke. But then I realized, why bother? Because, Kamala Harris has already beat me to it by running in this race."

This prompted a panelist on the left to say,“Where are all the adults when stuff like this is being said? I wish there were more people still around like John McCain. I might not [have] agreed with his politics, but as a man he was respectful and respectable.”  

“The panelists are sending an important message,” said Tom Rosshirt, co-creator of the Index. “The skills that can help you govern can also help you get elected. And that’s how it should be.”

 

THE LATEST SCORES

Panelists score by matching language from the speech passage with descriptions in the Dignity Index scoring guide, which is available here. 

 
 
 
 

Andy Kim, on the seat he flipped in 2018:

"It's why I stepped up for Congress six years ago, as a Democrat that won a district Trump won twice, to show that we can build a politics that brings us together rather than divides us."

  • 95% of panelists agree that this was dignity

  • The most frequently chosen score was a SIX

  • The reasons given the most were “We don’t let our disagreements keep us from cooperating on the things we agree on,” and “finds it deeply satisfying to cooperate with the other side.” 

  • 92% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 of the score of SIX

  • The Conservative average score was 5.667, and the Liberal average score was 5.760

"For some reason I believe a 6 it's a perfect fit for this passage. I always believe that working together help you achieved more things in life. and when the passage talks about how "we can build a politics that will bring us together" , I immediately think about other people involved. because together with more people we can achieve more."
A panelist on the right
"When people put their grievances aside. This is what you get. A compassionate politician."
A panelist in the middle
"I wish all politicians had this approach. I think we would get more done that way. Now, nothing gets done."
A panelist on the left

Elissa Slotkin speaks to her goals for the middle class:

"On substance, I believe very firmly that if America can’t be a place to get into the middle class and beyond, we’ve got a problem. It’s existential. So, my sun and my moon is protecting and enriching that middle class, getting people into it, and letting people live a good life and their kids behind them."

  • 87% of panelists agree that this was dignity

  • The most frequently chosen score was a FIVE

  • The reasons given the most were “I share my views with no contempt, so they’re easier for others to hear,” and “speaks openly, explaining their views, but never with contempt.”

  • 72% of panelists scored within +1 of the score of FIVE

  • The Conservative average score was 5.095, and the Liberal average score was 5.2

"This a positive remark. This a good start to bring the people back together."
A panelist in the middle

Mike Rogers’ priority for national security:

"Our national security has to come first — and I’m willing to work with anyone to make it happen. I did it before, and I’ll do it again."

  • 99% of panelists agree that this was dignity

  • The most frequently chosen score was a SIX

  • The reasons given the most were “We talk to the other side, searching for the values and interests we share, and using them as a basis for cooperation,” and “believes they have a duty to talk to the other side, find common interests and values, and use them as a basis for cooperation.”

  • 96% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of SIX

  • The Conservative average score was 5.810, and the Liberal average score was 6.160

"This is a good example of a six because he speaks of his willingness to work cooperatively with the other side on issues they find agreement on. He also references his history of doing that."
A panelist on the right
"A pleasant surprise that there was no name calling, just an open arms statement offering cooperation."
A panelist in the middle
"That's refreshing to hear. I hope he means it."
A panelist on the left
"in a democracy both sides should want whats best shows support to work together."
A panelist in the middle

Kari Lake, speaking about her opponent:

"For over a year, Ruben Gallego has been lying to the people of Arizona. Lying about his record, lying about his character, lying about his intentions. Yesterday we exposed him for the radical he is."

  • 96% of panelists agreed that this was contempt

  • The most frequently chosen score was a THREE

  • The reasons given the most were “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals,” and “disdains the other side.”

  • 87% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 of the score of THREE

  • The Conservative average score was 3.333, and the Liberal average score was 2.960

"To just call someone a liar without any proof is just wrong. In my opinion, when you point your finger at someone else, there are 4 fingers pointing back at you. But the problem is that people will just take that at face value and do no checking on their own to find out the truth."
A panelist on the left
"Not knowing much about this campaign, it sounds like the same old, same old like so many other campaign speeches. It's disheartening that so many candidates have the propensity to call each other liars."
A panelist in the middle
"This one is tough because it's possible that Ruben G has (objectively) been lying about his record. Maybe he said I voted X, and he actually voted Y. That would be objectively true. That said, this quote is a personal attack targeting performance."
A panelist on the left

Ruben Gallego, referring to his opponent:

"Kari Lake will do anything for power, even if it means lying to Arizonans. We can’t trust her."

  • 100% of panelists agree this was contempt

  • The most frequently chosen score was a THREE

  • The reasons given the most were “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals,” and “disdains the other side.”

  • 96% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of THREE

  • The Conservative average score was 3.476, and the Liberal average score was 2.920

"Again I do see this as a personal attack. When we are attacking someones behavior or the way they performance its really sad. I always keep saying the same thing, just because we don't like a candidate does not mean we need to fight against each other. We need to learn how to fight clean without insults."
A panelist on the right
"Other side saying the same thing."
A panelist in the middle
"I scored this a three based on two factors. Gallego made a personal attack against the candidate and offered no facts in support of his actions. Gallego could have offered facts to support his statement but instead chose to attack Lake."
A panelist on the left

Trisha Calvarese explains why she’s running for office:

“I'm running to fix our broken care systems, to lower costs, and to fire Lauren Boebert because she doesn't care about your family. But I do. If she won't do her job, I will.”

  • 92% of panelists agree this was contempt

  • The most frequently chosen score was a THREE

  • The reasons most given were “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals,” and “disdains the other side.”

  • 92% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of a THREE

  • The Conservative average score was 3.476, and the Liberal average score was 3.440

"This is another example of what is wrong with America and American politics."
A panelist on the right
"What concerns me about this type of political statement is that candidates like Calvarese always make broad generalized statements about how the opponent doesn't "care" about her constituents, and just how is she going to "fix" some system but have no concrete evidence or ideas to back anything."
A panelist in the middle
"Personal attacks are wearisome."
A panelist in the middle
"I scored this a three based on the personal attack against Boebert and the lack of any facts to support the statement. Calavarese could have opened the door for discussion of various issues if she had put any facts in to support her statement. she chose not to engage on this issue and did a disservice to her area's electorate."
A panelist on the left

Lauren Boebert's opening line at a rally:

"I was gonna kick things off with a joke. But then I realized, why bother? Because, Kamala Harris has already beat me to it by running in this race."

  • 95% of panelists agree this was contempt

  • The most frequently chosen score was a THREE

  • The reason most given was “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals,” and “disdains the other side.”

  • 95% of panelists scored it within +1 or -1 the score of a THREE

  • The Conservative average score was 3.714, and the Liberal average score was 3.440

"The only time humor is and should be acceptable in political commentaries is when one is poking fun at oneself. Though the sentiment expressed here is the truth, it should not be said. The sharing of ideas and the promoting of civility needs to regain lost ground in the war on manners."
A panelist on the right
"Where are all the adults when stuff like this is being said. I wish there were more people still around like John McCain. I might not of agreed with his politics, but as a man he was respectful and respectable."
A panelist on the left
"I was going to rate this quote a 4 as i assumed it was distorting their opponents position to make it sound unappealing but the implication is what makes it a 3 as the speaker then suggest their opponent entering the race is a joke in itself. This can be seen as a jab at the characters background and experience as the speaker may not deem them as a worry opposition or an easy win for them."
A panelist in the middle

Larry Hogan, referring to his opponent:

"I just want to start by saying that I like and respect Angela Alsobrooks. We got a chance to work together while I was Governor, we accomplished a great deal together for Prince Georges County and she's got a great life story."

  • 100% of panelists agree this was dignity

  • The most frequently chosen score was a SIX

  • The reason most given was “can see the good in the other side and will acknowledge their skills and accomplishments,” and “finds it deeply satisfying to cooperate with the other side.”

  • 83% of panelists scored it within +1 or -1 of a SIX

  • The Conservative average score was 6.095, and the Liberal average score was 6.320

"I am ranking this as a six because he is speaking so highly of his opponent at a time when he would be expected to call her an evil witch instead. It does take some political courage to speak highly of the person you are running against."
A panelist on the right
"This is so refreshing to hear after all weekend listening to hate being spewed from both sides."
A panelist on the left
"I wish more candidates did this. I would do it myself if I ran for public office."
A panelist on the left
"This is definitely a 6 because just by reading this passage I can see a good relationship here with the other side. We can see how they work together and get along. and this is something I would love to see more often, but sometimes it's very hard because candidates think that just by fighting with each other they will get what they want, and it's the opposite. Seeing a positive passage and somebody referring to an individual in a respectful way, it is something to admire."
A panelist on the right

All of the National Citizen Panelist quotes have been attributed verbatim to retain the authenticity of the language.

Press Contact: press@unite.us

 
Kate Larsennational citizens panel