Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1856
^^^Agree.
Unfortunately, what generally happens is one side will start it all rolling and then the other side has a rather hard chose to make:
1) Ignore it and stay on message.
2) Fight back
A) In defense
B) In attack
And I think most of us can agree that "1" generally does not work all too well.
|
In the most recent Democratic gubernatorial primary in NC, after months of mudslinging, one candidate said "no more." While her opponent continued to sling mud, she didn't -- she talked about her positions and her agenda. Certainly, it could be argued that she wouldn't have done it had she not already had a comfortable lead (she had held a strong lead in the polls that had been whittled away), but the fact is she trounced her opposition and gots lots of praise for "going clean."
We'll see what happens between now and November.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shinerbock
It'll be dirty, and it'll be on both sides. I think history and common knowledge indicates the right is better at this stuff.
|
Or worse, depending on how you look at it. (And I look at it as one who came of age with Jesse Helms and the Congressional Club.) I'm not sure that being better at calumny is really something to aspire to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
I don't feel like I want to see a really dirty campaign, but I think I understand some of what Shinerbock is saying.
If Obama is permitted to stay within the range of platitude, pre-written speeches, and basically scripted interactions with the press and public, he might carry the day on charisma.
But, if you suspect as Shinerbock does, that Obama at heart is a much more far left figure that the public presently realizes, then you see a need for the truth to come out.
|
And I have no problem with this if it's done honestly and above-board. What I have witnessed all to often (again, Jesse Helms, the Congressional Club and others) is that it is anything but honest and above-board -- it is done by twisting words, by misrepresenting the facts and by playing to fears and prejudices. And (sorry Shinerbock) I think it represents the worst form of political machinations -- the idea that the American people must be lied to and mislead in order to protect them from themselves and to "save the Republic." I find that much more frightening than the prospect of a very liberal
or very conservative president.
It always makes me wonder if the candidate really doesn't believe that he can (or should) be elected on his own merit.
Threaded Mode
