Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
Is tonight, of course.
After hearing some pollster pundit on NPR this morning say that President Bush may be losing ground because of the *negativity in the last debate and overall campaign I started thinking.
Of course that means that this is pure "blue sky" speculation, but maybe the eventual winner of the debates and even the election turns out to be the one who backs off and actually is more respectfull? People always say they're tired of attack ads and dirty campaigning!
Could that happen?
Nah! Just wishfull thinking.
|
Yep...the only problem with negative ads, and attacks...is...they work. It's a sad, but unfortunate fact. If they didn't, we wouldn't see them all the time.
I can't think of any election in recent times that didn't have some form of negative mudslinging. Also, fold in the 527 groups, and you have a guarantee of bashing one candidate over another. This election is much more Bush-bashing than Kerry simply from a financial standpoint. Kerry backed 527's as of early August had over $100MILLION in combined funds to Bush-backed 527's around 2-3% of that. As I saw somewhere in an Op/Ed..."for Bush, soft money is just a dab of TX perfume, for Kerry, it's oxygen"
What is almost unique about these attacks, from both 2000 and 2004, is the amount of vitriolic attacks. Prior to 2000, most negative ads were direct attacks on records and/or issues...since 2000, it's much more PERSONAL in nature.
I'd love to see "respectful" ads as well, but, the sad fact is, they don't work with the same impact, which is ironic since everyone I know wishes they wouldn't see so much negative stuff. But in the broader aspect, they unfortunately have more impact.
FWIW, as far as the debates go, I would have to say that Kerry won the first one running away, which surprised me. Cheney took Edwards to the woodshed in the VP debate, which didn't. Debate 2 was a tie: Kerry won on style, Bush on substance, and #3 would be a narrow win for Bush (Kerry seemed more like Bush in debate #1 last night). Kerry will always win on style, as Bush can't give an eloquent address all that often...he's too down-to-earth in personality, but that is what is appealing to me - he's says what he says AS HE IS, he doesn't put on airs, as Kerry seems to be able to do very well.
Kerry's attack on Cheney's daughter was a big mistake - it turned off a lot of people...over the top and uncalled for. Even Edwards backed off of this in the VP debate...it was much more a glancing blow. What really angered me was Edward's wife this morning saying that the only conclusion she could reach was that Cheney "is ashamed of his own daughter."
Even more over the top than Kerry was.