The indiscriminate use of the political vignette in campaign times, the same that entails a polarized discourse with the ability to influence an audience that will become part of an electorate that will go out to vote influenced by the assimilated message, represents a political and normative problem inasmuch as graphic humor is an unregulated content that has the ability to influence the development of electoral processes. The methodology used to reveal the role of the vignette in the context of an electoral campaign was the critical analysis of the multimodal discourse of the authors Kress and Van Leeuwen (2001), complemented by the linguistic series of the journalistic design of the daily press, proposed by Canga (1994) and Bolos (2001) for the analysis of the media of the vignettes, and a survey of the receiving public. The results revealed that the political cartoonist uses semiotic-discursive resources to fabricate a polarized discourse with political purposes, that the traditional media have a different political agenda than the cartoonist, and that the receiving public perceives the political bias and his intentions to make political campaign in a subversive way. The conclusions were that political cartoons are a means of manufacturing and enacting polarization in the context of an electoral campaign, that political cartoonists in a current context have adopted behaviors typical of so-called influencers and that the media do not determine or influence the message contained in the vignettes, but they do convey it.