Campaign commercials make me ill.

[Bartholomew]

I would seriously vote for a candidate that ran commercials saying what they would DO--and omit their opinion of the opponent. I don't care that Obama can run a commercial saying how McCain represents the same old crap. I don't care that McCain can run a commercial saying that Obama isn't fit to lead. Those commercials do little more than infuriate me.

Here's a challenge, candidates: write a commercial that highlights you; that highlights your plans and hopes. You'll impress me far more with an idea than you ever will with slander.

[InfinityGoddess]

Here's a challenge, candidates: write a commercial that highlights you; that highlights your plans and hopes. You'll impress me far more with an idea than you ever will with slander.

That would be nice, but if it hadn't been for the likes of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, we wouldn't have had to have campaign commercials that talks smack about the other guy and not focus on the issues.

It's really sad.

[Mac H.]

It is also a natural result of having so few candidates running.

If there were 20 candidates running, it would be more effective to run a single commercial highlighting your strengths, rather than run 19 commercials about your opponents' weaknesses. (It certainly wouldn't eliminate negative commercials .. but would give them less ROI)

Perhaps a change to a preferential system (aka 'Instant Runoff') might encourage more candidates ... because people wouldn't be 'wasting' their vote by voting for someone who doesn't have a chance of winning.

It would also avoid the cost of a potential run-off election too.

Mac

[whistlelock]

Here's a challenge, candidates: write a commercial that highlights you; that highlights your plans and hopes. You'll impress me far more with an idea than you ever will with slander.


You'll see that in about a month or so. Then, about two weeks before the election back to attacks, and then the last few days it will swing back to "i'm so cool" ads.

[Bartholomew]

I keep nagging my state reps about instant runoff voting.

It doesn't seem to get much attention. It's such an EASY thing to do; why are we still wasting votes?

#

When I'm with a group of friends, and I'm trying to gain influence among them, I do not immediately begin trashing someone else who would like their influence. I listen to what they say. I do them favors. I tell them my ideas.

This is true regardless of the size of the group. Who decided that it was good politics to trash your opponent? While it does make your opponent look bad to some--it also makes you look much, much worse to the people already opposed to you.

If a candidate ran commercials that highlighted policies and ideas instead of character flaws, wouldn't they have a better chance of winning votes they might not otherwise get? When I see a commercial telling me how bad McCain is, I start to sympathize with him. I do not like John McCain--but when you start telling me what a prick he is, alarms ring in my head and I have to go find out for myself. And then I find out how badly the truth has been distorted--how information has been removed from context--and I really don't want to cast that vote anymore.

Because when a candidate slanders someone, he's just highlighting his own human errors. He's just telling me, "I can't control myself and behave like a normal person in polite society. I have to resort to first grade behavior, or I don't think I'll ever get my way."

IG: I'm not particularly interested in who started the trend; I'll take you at your word that it was them.

I am far, far more interested in the candidate who proves that he can, in fact, behave like someone who's finished primary school.

[Don]

That would be nice, but if it hadn't been for the likes of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, we wouldn't have had to have campaign commercials that talks smack about the other guy and not focus on the issues.

It's really sad.
OMG, like the first attack by one politician on another happened in the last 40 years. Please, in this country alone it goes back as far as 1792 (http://www.radaronline.com/photos/2008/04/negative_campaign_ads_george_washington_thomas_jef ferson_01.php) in Presidential contests.

Your partisan slip is showing. :D

[Christine N.]

I've seen a couple, mostly local candidates. The Democrat guy running for Delaware governor (? - since I don't live in Del, I don't pay much attention to the positions) has a terrific ad where he outlines exactly what he wants to do and how he'll make the state better.

It's a good ad, not a single handful of mud in it.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I would seriously vote for a candidate that ran commercials saying what they would DO--and omit their opinion of the opponent. I don't care that Obama can run a commercial saying how McCain represents the same old crap. I don't care that McCain can run a commercial saying that Obama isn't fit to lead. Those commercials do little more than infuriate me.

Doesn't matter if you care or not.

The point is, attack ads work or they'd try something else.

[maestrowork]

Here's a challenge, candidates: write a commercial that highlights you; that highlights your plans and hopes. You'll impress me far more with an idea than you ever will with slander.

That's what Ronald Reagan did. His ads didn't even mention the Democrats or Mondale.

Attack ads work because people want them to work. As Ronald Reagan demonstrated, it didn't have to be that way.

I personally would welcome that back with glee. I'm so sick and tired of all the negative ads from both sides. I'm not going to vote AGAINST someone. I want to vote FOR someone.

[InfinityGoddess]

Your partisan slip is showing. :D

I'm not really a "partisan", for I have no fealty to either party.

[VGrossack]

Turn off the TV?

[Shadow_Ferret]

That's what Ronald Reagan did. His ads didn't even mention the Democrats or Mondale.

Attack ads work because people want them to work. As Ronald Reagan demonstrated, it didn't have to be that way.

Reagan was special. I don't think anyone can compete with him in that arena.

I also wonder if anyone could get elected today just talking about a bright shining city on the hill.

[Don]

I'm not really a "partisan", for I have no fealty to either party.
The attack on Attwater and Rove was certainly partisan, however.

[Williebee]

I also wonder if anyone could get elected today just talking about a bright shining city on the hill.

They'd probably get slammed for advocating nuclear power. :)

[Robert Toy]

Turn off the TV?
Not an option.

Rove and Co. have disabled this function in all Democratic households...see you should register Independent.

[InfinityGoddess]

The attack on Attwater and Rove was certainly partisan, however.


I think the word you would be looking for isn't exactly the word "partisan". I have legitimate critiques of Atwater and Rove, although to his credit, Atwater had a deathbed repentance.

[maestrowork]

Reagan was special. I don't think anyone can compete with him in that arena.

I also wonder if anyone could get elected today just talking about a bright shining city on the hill.

But wouldn't it be nice if both parties would at least try? They did try to play it positive for a while, and then the negative stuff started to fly.

It would have been nice if they had at least tried. Someone will be elected, anyway.

[Bartholomew]

Doesn't matter if you care or not.

The point is, attack ads work or they'd try something else.

Which logical (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/post-hoc.html) fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/confusing-cause-and-effect.html) is that...? Just because someone continues to do something does not mean what they do is effective.

I suspect we're defining "work" differently.

The way I see it, attack ads like this serve only to entrench the people who were already going to vote a particular way, and to alienate and anger the people who are going to vote the other.

Can you provide any proof that these sort of ads actually get voters on the fence to swing their legs over?


I personally would welcome that back with glee. I'm so sick and tired of all the negative ads from both sides. I'm not going to vote AGAINST someone. I want to vote FOR someone.

You're just the voter. You don't count.