
If you think campaign yard signs are litter on a stick, ask Ben Griffin.
Eight years ago, Griffin zoomed from political unknown to a player in contests for seats on the Nashville Metro Council in Tennessee after two signs bearing his name were placed in a yard near an elementary school. Five incumbents were running. In an online survey, 25 of percent parents whose children attended the school named Griffin as one of their top three choices for the five at-large positions.
But Griffin didn’t exist. He was the creation of Vanderbilt University researchers who wanted to test the effectiveness of yard signs and so created a fictional candidate to see whether signs can influence voters. “I would say we were not absolutely surprised, but we found it pretty impressive that two yard signs could deliver such an effect on people’s opinions,” says Elizabeth Zechmeister, a Vanderbilt political science professor who helped conduct the experiment.
It’s research like this, plus tradition, that explains why Springfield for weeks has been decorated – that’s one word for it – with yard signs promoting candidates in the upcoming April 2 election. And with 334 candidates running for public office in Sangamon County, there is no shortage of signs and strategies for placing them.
From mayor to alderman to Springfield Metropolitan and Exposition Authority board trustee, nearly 140 positions are on the ballot in Sangamon County, and so signs of all colors and one shape, rectangular, have gone up in all sorts of places. Besides yards, there are empty lots and, of course, Signville, aka farmland abutting Stanford Avenue where candidates long have been welcome to place signs. And they do.
One school of thought holds that signs posted on vacant land do no good – candidates should put their advertising in yards so that passersby can see that they have support from real people who, presumably, care about their community. Others say signs in cornfields can’t hurt. Some advise avoiding yards with houses that have peeling paint and other code violations. Others note that we can’t all afford nice houses, and so a sign in a yard, no matter what the house might look like, is better than no sign at all.
“Oh, Jesus,” blurted Mayor Jim Langfelder, brow furrowed, when told that one of his campaign signs is posted at an empty-looking strip mall on North Grand Avenue, with the most prominent feature being a former supermarket that’s been vacant for years. Surviving businesses include a dollar store, a video gambling parlor and a payday loan shop. Not an ideal image for a politician who touts economic development. One day later, a sign touting Frank Lesko for city clerk popped up alongside the mayor’s.
Langfelder’s signs went up weeks after Frank Edwards, his opponent, plastered signs throughout a city still in winter’s grip. “People were getting anxious,” says the mayor, who maintains that six weeks is plenty of time for a candidate’s signs to work whatever magic they might work. If you have them, use them, Edwards figures.
“We just thought, ‘We’ve ordered them, we’ve got them, they’re not doing any good sitting in the garage,’” Edwards says. “The earlier we get them out there, the more people see them.”
“You’ve got to get your name out there”
If Sangamon County has a yard sign king, it’s county auditor Andy Goleman.
Goleman
isn’t up for election – he hasn’t been on a ballot since the fall of
2016, when he ran unopposed after being appointed to the auditor’s post
the previous year. A year before the election, Goleman spent more than
$10,000 on yard signs. It was the biggest yardsign buy by a politician
in Sangamon County since 1999, as far back as the Illinois State Board
of Elections database goes.
Ten
grand, roughly the amount that Langfelder and Paul Palazzolo combined
spent on signs in the 2015 mayoral campaign, buys a lot of cardboard and
plastic – 2,500 yard signs and 100 larger ones suitable for
high-traffic locations, to be precise. Lacking an opponent, Goleman
ended up using 200. He says he got a volume discount. “That’s really why
I did it,” he says. “If I had to do it again, I wouldn’t have bought so
many. You never know if you’re going to have an opponent. I just wanted
to make sure I had enough.”
As
a politician with an easily misspelled name – it’s “Goleman,” not
“Goldman” or “Coleman” – the auditor says signs are a must, especially
considering that his name, unlike names of the county treasurer or
circuit clerk, isn’t on property tax bills or traffic tickets or other
ubiquitous paperwork. “My office is not like that – my office is
internal,” Goleman says. “You’ve got to get your name out there.”
Lots
of politicians agree. State records show that candidates and political
committees have spent more than $36 million on signs in the past 20
years, although that total, which includes billboards in addition to
yard signs, is a rough approximation. Frank Vala, owner of Valco Awards
in Springfield, has collected more than $100,000 for signs during that
time period, state records show. Sometimes, Vala says, he hasn’t been
paid at all and so has learned the hard way: If an established political
party orders signs, send a bill; if it’s Ned Newcomer running as a Bull
Moose, collect in advance. His biggest soaking, he says, came in 1998,
when Loleta Didrickson didn’t pay after losing the Republican primary
for U.S. Senate to Peter Fitzgerald. Vala recalls forgiving a $27,000
debt.
Yard signs, Vala says, aren’t complicated.
Focus
on the name. Use bold colors with plenty of contrast. And always
include a union label, even if it’s so tiny you can’t read it from a
foot away. “We’ve had people say, ‘You sure I need it?’” says Vala, who
contracts with a Kansas City firm to manufacture signs ordered in
Springfield. “I say, ‘No, but one thing’s for sure: If you put it there,
you don’t have an enemy.’” While Vala has his opinions, most
candidates, he says, already know what they want when they come to his
shop.
Some are disappointed in the result. “They usually come with the
artwork and the color combination because their wife or their girlfriend
or someone said ‘This is what it ought to be,’” Vala says. “And when
they see the four-by-eight, they say ‘That doesn’t stand out very
good.’” Signs for Griffin, the fictional candidate, are a classic
template. The lettering is both blue and red, which, some pros say,
appeals to Democrats and Republicans -- at least one sign company in
online advice says that candidates in nonpartisan races should consider
red if they’re after GOP voters.
Griffin’s sign contained just two
words: Ben Griffin. Candidates should remember, Vala advises, that
motorists have just a few seconds to absorb a sign. “Make the name
biggest and forget the details,” he says. “People don’t remember what you’re
running for. They see ‘Frank Vala’: ‘Hell, that name’s familiar -- I’m
going to vote for him.’” It’s tough to prove negatives, but still worth
wondering whether yard signs changed the course of Illinois history.
In
the 2010 Republican gubernatorial primary, state Sen. Bill Brady,
R-Bloomington, spent $34,500 on yard signs before the primary. Former
attorney general Jim Ryan spent nearly $21,000 on signs. Far behind was
Kirk Dillard, who spent $3,200, according to state records.
Dillard
finished second to Brady, losing the nomination by 193 votes in a
seven-way race – it was one of the closest elections in state history.
Brady, a conservative, was widely considered unelectable in the fall
and, sure enough, Pat Quinn beat him. It was the first time since
Abraham Lincoln was alive that Democrats had won three successive
gubernatorial elections. If the GOP had nominated a less-conservative
candidate, Quinn might have lost and Bruce Rauner might never have run.
Dillard,
a moderate Republican who once worked for Jim Edgar, doesn’t discount
the importance of yard signs. “Yard signs are a way of life,” he says.
“They help – not as much as some people think they do.” If he’d spent
more on yard signs in 2010, Dillard says, he would have had to reduce
spending elsewhere, perhaps on television commercials or mailings or
Chicago-area billboards.
“I would have loved to have had more yard signs,” Dillard said. “It’s just a matter of limited resources.”
All
things being equal and considering the margin, Dillard might have won
the 2010 primary if he’d spent more on yard signs without reducing other
spending, according to Zeichmeister, the Vanderbilt political science
professor, and Jonathan Krasno, a political science professor at
Binghamton University in New York state who’s done research showing that
signs can help in squeakers but not landslides.
Zeichmeister
says that yard signs help most in races where voters don’t have much
information about candidates. She cites a recent trip to a wine shop
where, not knowing much about wine, she bought a bottle with “LZ” on the
label. Those are the initials of her name. “I’m like everybody else,”
she says. “We do tend to be drawn to things we’re familiar with.”
Without knowing how many votes Dillard would have lost by reducing
spending elsewhere, Krasno says, it’s impossible to say whether yard
signs would have made a difference. “When the margin is 193 votes, it
could have been changed by a hiccup in the morning,” Krasno says.
J.
William Roberts, a former Sangamon County state’s attorney and U.S.
attorney who keeps track of politics, puts it this way: “As longtime
State Rep. J. David Jones once said. ‘I know that half of what I do in
campaigning is of little value, I just don’t know which half.”
“Some candidates have egos”
Vala,
a Republican, sells signs to any candidate with cash. This election
season, he says he’s got two signs at his house, each for a candidate
running for office in Leland Grove, where he lives. “People in Leland
Grove, they don’t like signs in their neighbor’s yards,” Vala says.
“They just don’t like signs, period.”
Vala
questions the value of festooning one’s yard with lots of signs. “When
you just let anybody and everybody put things up, it just becomes a
junkyard,” he says. “I’m talking myself out of business.”
Vala
needn’t worry. The popularity of yard signs and other overt forms of
political expression has mushroomed over time. Researchers say that the
display of signs, campaign bumper stickers and political buttons more
than doubled between 1984, when less than 10 percent of the population
made beliefs known to the world, and 2008, when one in five Americans
either displayed a yard sign, wore a candidate’s button or put a bumper
sticker on their car.
Rather
than candidates, Todd Makse, a political science professor at Florida
International University who’s co-authored a book on campaign yard signs
due for publication this spring, focuses on people who display signs
and their motives. “Mostly, it’s about people expressing themselves – I
think that’s one of our big takeaways,” Makse says. “Signs become this
kind of identity marking, both in terms of displaying how people feel
and how they see other people. Instead of the guy with the yappy dog,
it’s the guy who likes Trump. It’s a label.”
Some
results don’t seem surprising. For instance, about 30 percent of people
who display campaign yard signs think such signs are eyesores, Makse
and his colleagues found; conversely, more than half of people surveyed
who post no signs find them ugly. More than 80 percent of sign
displayers think campaign yard signs are interesting while slightly more
than half of those who don’t post signs say the same thing. Folks who
display signs also are more likely to say that they pay attention to
signs than those who don’t put up signs.
Both
sign displayers and those who keep yards sign-free were consistent on
one point: Within a few percentage points, a statistical wash, more than
60 percent of both groups said that campaign yard signs remind them of
divisiveness.
“When it
comes to viewing signs as a reminder of divisiveness…there is no
difference between displayers and non-displayers – indeed, the symbolism
of the signs may be the one constant across individuals,” Makse and his
fellow researchers write.
The prevalence of signs makes a difference.
Makse and his research team found that people who live in neighborhoods
where signs are plentiful are more likely to find them informative and
less likely to ignore them than people who live in neighborhoods with
few or no signs. Nearly one in four believe campaign signs are “a
typical part of the neighborhood culture,” the researchers found, while
nearly one in five say they live where signs are either banned by formal
rules or negatively viewed by residents. Fewer than one in four
respondents believed signs influence voters, with nearly 60 percent open
to the possibility that signs might make up minds.
Campaign signs can provoke emotions.
One-third
of respondents to a survey by Makse’s team said that signs make them
proud, 26 percent said signs make them angry and nearly 20 percent
reported that signs make them anxious, with folks who display signs more
likely to get emotional than people who do not.
Signs
also provoke feelings in candidates. Dillard says signs can give a
psychological advantage. “It gives the candidates the false impression
that they have more support than they do to see yard signs,” he says.
“It may surprise you: Some candidates have egos.”
The
effect, Dillard says, isn’t limited to signs in yards. He recalls a
candidate whom he won’t identify who told a campaign manager that he
wanted a $6,000 billboard erected alongside a Chicago expressway. “The
campaign manager is arguing with the candidate: ‘For $6,000, I can do a
lot of things,’” Dillard says. “The candidate told the campaign manager,
‘Look, when I’m weary and down, it pumps me up to work more hours each
day to see that billboard on the Kennedy Expressway.’ The campaign
manager said, ‘If if makes you work harder or go to more doors, I’ll buy
it.’ That’s a true story.”
While
some veteran campaign strategists discount them, yard signs won’t go
away because candidates get attached, Makse and his fellow researchers
write. Consider a Democratic political operative who told researchers
that candidates, even smart ones with well-financed television campaigns
and digital strategies and lots of direct mailings, demand signs. “But I
just see my opponents’ signs everywhere!” researchers write in the
upcoming book, recalling what the operative told them about candidates’
demands for yard signs. “We’ve got to get some signs out!” Researchers
concluded that candidates, in their emotional responses to signs, aren’t
much different than their supporters.
“The
logic of using signs to build name recognition plays second fiddle in
the visceral reactions that give signs an outsized presence in the minds
of people who are paying attention,” researchers wrote.
And when the party’s over…
In
Peoria, supporters of a $35 million advisory referendum to improve the
city’s libraries raised $90,000 in 2007 and spent 10 percent of the
kitty on yard signs. The referendum passed by 72 percent. It was the
largest margin of victory for any library referendum in state history,
says library spokeswoman Trisha Noack, who credits yard signs. Signs,
she says, are more personal than television or radio ads.
“We
just kept printing them,” Noack recalls. “Having them in neighborhoods
and people’s yards made a difference – it encouraged one-on-one
conversations. … Word of mouth and people talking to other people is so
important.”
In
Springfield, Lakeisha Purchase, candidate for alderman in Ward 5, got an
early start, striving to get signs up before snows came and the ground
froze. Signs, she says, are effective in informing people who’s running.
“The ‘Purchase’ stands out – that’s a unique last name that not a lot
of people know,” she says of her signs. “People may forget ‘Lakeisha,’
but they will not forget ‘Purchase.’” Andrew Proctor, the incumbent,
says signs build momentum. He says he knocks on doors even if a sign for
his opponent is in the yard – there’s always a chance for a split
household. He says he’s lost count, but he’s “well into the hundreds”
when it comes to sign volume.
Purchase
complains that some of her signs have disappeared, and they aren’t
cheap. Sign theft isn’t unprecedented. Four years ago, Ward 8 Ald. Kris
Theilen recalls, 150 signs from his campaign and several others
disappeared from a neighborhood. Ward 7 Ald. Joe McMenamin cautions
against jumping to conclusions. Sometimes, he says, voters shift
allegiances, so it’s best to call the opposing campaign to make sure
that a supporter hasn’t switched sides and removed a sign that’s no
longer wanted.
Ultimately, campaigns end, politicians seek other offices and once-precious signs have no purpose. What then?
Goleman,
the county auditor, has plenty of signs from his days as a county board
member stashed in his garage, next to the ones he didn’t use in his
first campaign for county auditor. Theilen, who can’t run for
re-election due to term limits, has found that campaign signs make a
great floor for his doghouse. Lesko, the city clerk who owns rental
property, has used campaign signs to board up windows. While doorbelling
this year, Proctor says he encountered a supporter who was using one of
his old signs to block a window so an indoor cat couldn’t escape.
“That’s great,” he says.
Contact Bruce Rushton at brushton@illinoistimes.com.