Josh Stein’s ads about Mark Robinson certainly worked.

They worked because they defined Robinson early in the race and because they used the most devastating weapon in politics: Robinson himself on camera saying, “abortion in this country’s not about protecting the lives of mothers – it’s about killing a child because you weren’t responsible enough to keep your skirt down.”

Stein’s ads buried Robinson in a double-digit hole in the polls. It may be impossible for Robinson to climb out.

But what about all the ads we’re seeing during the news, jammed up bumper-to-bumper like rush-hour traffic on I-40?

It’s hard to cut through that clutter.

And by now North Carolinians may have acquired immunity to Republicans’ familiar formula: megadoses of negative ads with scary music, grainy images and dark warnings of invading immigrants and marauding criminals.

Through dozens of campaigns over nearly 50 years, I’ve had a hand in making hundreds of ads. I feel like I’ve seen millions of them.

I suspect that today calls for a calmer and quieter approach, one that is factual and objective and, instead of recycling stale rhetoric, respects and informs the voter:

“In this race, the candidates disagree on abortion. Candidate A believes the government should ban all abortions. Candidate B believes the pregnant woman, not government, should make that decision.”

The ad should sound and look like a voter-information guide from an objective, third-party source.

The challenge for campaigns is reaching low-information voters who are put off by politics.

We’ve tried scaring them and screaming at them for a long time.

Maybe it’s time to lower our voices and talk straight to them.

Or, if you’re lucky like Josh Stein, let your opponent talk straight to them.