Tag: Negativity

Clinton: The Claws Come Out…… (I Have Been Waiting)

Before I begin…..the big news of the day is that there is a large snowstorm heading for the East Coast…..before you break into a panic…..let me say one thing…..It is WINTER you dummy!  Get over it!

I recall the early days….by that I mean last year or so…..when the Dems were making nice with each other…..the two leaders said that they would not run a negative campaign…..a fine gesture……

Hillary has been in the lead with the exception of New Hampshire and she was polite and well…..nice.

But that has changed……she is not doing well in New Hampshire and now she is behind in Iowa…….

Things have gone “from bad to nightmare” for Hillary Clinton thanks to a new CNN/WMUR poll out of New Hampshire, per the Washington Post. The poll—which quizzed 927 of the state’s likely Democrats from Jan. 13 to 18—shows Bernie Sanders has expanded a solid lead in early December by 10 points to an insane 27-point lead with a 4.8-point margin of error. Another good sign for Sanders: About 52% of voters say they’ve decided who will get their vote in the primary. The only downside for the Vermont senator is that his support “rests heavily on groups whose participation in New Hampshire primaries is less reliable—notably younger voters and those who aren’t registered Democrats,” reports CNN.

Clinton trails by 45 points among undeclared voters, but just nine points among registered Democrats, though she led Sanders by 7 points in the latter category in December. Sanders is also enjoying a 91% favorability rating—”which is basically where Michael Jordan’s favorability ratings would have been in Chicago in 1993,” quips the Post. Clinton—who was described by 55% of respondents as the “least honest” Democratic candidate—sits at 65%. However, Clinton does show an advantage nationally with minorities and voters over 50, per Time. She leads Sanders by 15 points among Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters in a Monmouth University poll released Tuesday, with a 5.2% margin of error.

All the nice sentiments are eroding away……now that Hil is losing to Bernie the gloves have come off…..she and her surrogates are playing the one card I have been waiting for…..the socialist card.

The GOP has been nothing but negativity I expected better from the Dems…..but after thinking back to the 2008 primaries I realized that she does that when she feels her grasp of eventual power slipping….

Recently Bernie made a statement about Hillary as part of the “establishment” and their money……she immediately took offense and used Planned Parenthood as an example of the “establishment”……but I hate to pee on her parade but her examples are shoving money at her in the thousands and probably millions…..

Source: Yes, the Human Rights Campaign and Planned Parenthood made establishment endorsements – AMERICAblog News

She will do what she needs to do to destroy her competition….that includes lame name calling and the fear tactic……the GOP should be proud of her tactics…..

I may be a Bernie supporter….but they all have a “group think” mentality…..basically they are ALL on the same page on many issues……

Source: Democrats in ‘Group Think’ Land | Consortiumnews

I am not pleased that the Dems are all on the same page when it comes to foreign policy…….but then  expected nothing different…….

Will Robo-Calls Work?

Only if you are a pathetic moron.

Two Republican senators facing reelection battles in states also seeing presidential campaign attention are speaking out against anti-Obama robocalls from John McCain’s campaign and the RNC.

Maine Sen. Susan Collins expressed her dispeasure first on Friday.

“They don’t serve John McCain well,” Collins told PolitickerME. “This kind of campaign call does not reflect the kind of leader that he is.”

And today Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman’s campaign issued a blanket statement condemning negative ads and phone calls.

“I call on Al Franken, the DNC, the RNC, the DSCC, the NRSC and any other organization engaged in negative attacks on any candidate to bring them to an immediate end,” Coleman said in the statement.

Asked if this included McCain’s campaign, Coleman spokesman Luke Friedrich replied:  “The senator is calling on everyone.”

On Fox News Sunday, whose transcript the Obama campaign just sent reporters, McCain was forced to defend himself from the charge of hypocrisy for waves of negative robocalls. It’s a mark of how the public fascination with this race has made issues of process — robocalls are a tactic meant to go under the radar — instantly front and center.

WALLACE: But Senator back, if I may, back in 2000 when you were the target of robo calls, you called these hate calls and you said–

MCCAIN: They were.

WALLACE: And you said the following: “I promise you I have never and will never have anything to do with that kind of political tactic.” Now you’ve hired the same guy who did the robo calls against you to, reportedly, to do the robo calls against Obama and the Republican Senator Susan Collins, the co-chair of your campaign in Maine, has asked you to stop the robo calls. Will you do that?

MCCAIN: Of course not. These are legitimate and truthful and they are far different than the phone calls that were made about my family and about certain aspects that — things that this is — this is dramatically different and either you haven’t — didn’t see those things in 2000.

MCCAIN: Or you don’t know the difference between that and what is a legitimate issue, and that is Senator Obama being truthful with the American people. But let me tell you what else I think you should be talking about and the American people should be talking about. In the debate the other night, I asked Senator Obama to repudiate a statement made by John Lewis, a man I admire and respect and have written about that connected me and Sarah Palin —
WALLACE: This is the congressman, civil rights leader.

MCCAIN: Civil rights leader, American hero. That connected me and Sarah Palin to segregationists, to the campaign of George Wallace, and even alluded to the bombing of a church where four children, four children were killed, and I asked him to repudiate that statement. I have repudiated every statement made by any fringe person in the Republican Party. And it has come up from time to time, and it probably will. The fact that Senator Obama would not repudiate that statement I think is something the American people will make a judgment about. That robo call is accurate. It’s totally accurate

Apparently there are negative and positive negatives in McCain’s little corner of the realm of reality

Damn, The Smell!

The recent attacks leveled at the Dem by the GOP scare machine smells like crap.

Faced with dwindling poll numbers and an increasingly hostile political environment created by the economy’s dizzying downward spiral, the Republican campaign of John McCain and Sarah Palin has responded with a virulently right-wing appeal directed to the most politically backward layers in America.

Campaign rallies for the Republican presidential and vice-presidential candidates have taken on an increasingly angry and even violent tone.

Virulent denunciations of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama delivered by Palin at campaign rallies in Florida this week were met with shouts from the crowd of “treason” and, in one case, “kill him.”

At an event in New Mexico, McCain delivered a stock rhetorical line aimed at invoking fears of the Democratic candidate: “Who is Barack Obama?” Without missing a beat, a shout came back from the audience: “terrorist.”

The atmosphere in these Republican events resembles more and more that of a lynch mob. And the continuous attempts to paint Obama as a “traitor” and “terrorist” have the potential of inciting real violence, including attempts on the Democratic candidate’s life.

Yet, the clear aim of the Republican campaign is to link him—and by association, Obama—to the terrorist attacks of September 11, thereby painting the Democratic candidate as a traitor and unfit for office.

The right-wing campaign presently being waged by the Republican Party has ominous implications. While it is highly questionable whether it will shift votes from Obama to McCain, it is serving to mobilize the most reactionary political forces and whip them to a fever pitch.

These forces will not go away after the November election. Given an Obama victory at the polls, they will be utilized to place continuous pressure on the incoming administration, driving it ever further towards the right.

I am sorry to say that I can recall only one guy that tried to whip up the crowd with hate and he stomped across Europe.  I realize that I will be attacked for saying that, but what does all the hate crap really accomplish , if not to whip the people into a laver?

Crap Drops Keep Fallin’ On His Head

I do not know if the rewrite of the B.J. Thomas song is possible or not.

His campaign has made a decision that since he is losing his ass that they have no other choice but to start slinging more mud than they have in the past.  This Ayers guy was the first salvo…….then the Dems bring up the Keating thing and the repubs make sure that all know that McCain was exonerated in that thing.  Yes he was…he was censured, but exonerated.  And Ayers was accused but never convicted of a crime…that somehow seems missing in all the crap.

But McCain and the witless attack dog keep pushing Ayers down the throats of gullible voters.  The Dems need to let Biden bring up the Vogler and the Alaskan Independence Party and Palin’s connection to them.  I believe hubby was an ardent supporter of the party until 2002.    If you are afraid of that attack then bring up this one.

GOP presidential nominee John McCain has past connections to a private group that supplied aid to guerrillas seeking to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua in the Iran-Contra affair.

The U.S. Council for World Freedom was part of an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. The group was dedicated to stamping out communism around the globe.

The council’s founder, retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub, said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain was launching his political career in Arizona. Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member in the group.

Elected to the House in 1982 and at a time when he was on the board of Singlaub’s council, McCain was among Republicans on Capitol Hill expressing support for the Contras, a CIA-organized guerrilla force in Central America. In 1984, Congress cut off CIA funds for the Contras.

“I don’t ever remember hearing about his resigning, but I really wasn’t worried about that part of our activities, a housekeeping thing,” said Singlaub. “If he didn’t want to be on the board that’s OK. It wasn’t as if he had been active participant and we were going to miss his help. He had no active interest. He certainly supported us.”

Do not fear, this can be used to Obama’s advantage, the only thing is that they have to have enough cajones to use it.  If the McCain camp wants mud, then I say give it to them.  The more crap they have to clean off of their faces the better Obama will look to the voter.

Guilty by Association

Since no one in the media has addressed this piece of information, I will do it for them.
Sarah Palin is attacking Barack Obama for “palling around with terrorists,” twisting media accounts to falsely connect Obama with the Weather Underground figure Bill Ayers. Let me say that I have no sympathy, and never had, for the anarcho-syndicalist craziness and bona fide infantile leftism, that Ayers and his associates represented nearly 40 years ago, when Obama was in the 3rd grade.

By contrast, Sarah Palin has real and documented connections to the Alaska Independence Party, which is far more extremist than even the most far right of the Republican Party. The main platform of that party, as Alaska Independence Party leaders have stated, is a rejection of the United States and an effort to cause Alaska to leave the union. Given what this party represents today, Palin’s ties to that party deserve to be an issue in the campaign.

Alaska Independence Party leaders have also claimed that Sarah Palin was a member before she was elected mayor of Wasilla, which the McCain campaign has denied. Officially, records show that Palin was a registered Republican since 1982, six years before she married her husband Todd, British Petroleum supervisory employee, self-employed fisherman, and snowmobile mobile racer.

The Director of the Alaska Division of Elections has stated that Todd Palin, however, was a registered member of the Alaska Independence Party from 1995 to 2002. Todd Palin, all sources agree, has played a significant role as a policy adviser to his wife’s administration. There is significant disagreement about Sarah Palin’s attendance at Alaska Independence Party conventions before she became mayor of Wasilla. She did visit their convention after she became mayor, however, which the McCain workers try to downplay as a mere courtesy call. As governor, she sent a video tape to the most recent 2008 convention telling the delegates to “keep up the good work” and calling their convention “inspiring.”

Here is a little history on the Alaska Independence Party. The Party was founded by an ultra-rightist gold miner, Joe Vogler in the 1970s with an “anti-American” platform. Palin has denounced those abroad in oil rich countries who “hate America.” Joe Vogler hated America. He said in the 1970s, “I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I have no use for America or her damned institutions.”

Later Vogler said that “the fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred of the US government. And I won’t be buried under their damn flag….when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.” He said this in an oral history interview at the University of Alaska in 1991, at which time Bill Ayers had rejected his own past and had become respectable. Two years later Vogler disappeared. A criminal subsequently confessed to murdering him in a conflict over the sale of plastic explosives (which may suggest terrorism).

Like I have said in the past that I really detest the whole premise of guilt by association.  I mean there are many of us that would be guilty if that was the law of the land.  But I guess it is win at any cost.

Negatively Speaking

MUDSLINGING, NAME-CALLING, ACCUSATIONS and counterattacks. Sounds like a bad way to run a marketing campaign–particularly during a presidential race–but all those negative ads may have a more positive result than you think. What many of us call “negative” or “attack” ads are termed “comparative” ads by those in the industry, and the bottom line is that they appear to work.

“They’re very effective,” says Rick Farmer, Ph.D., an assistant professor of political science at the University of Akron in Akron, Ohio, who has studied the impact of comparative ads. Farmer, other researchers and campaign consultants agree that negative ads are more memorable than positive ones, provided they reinforce a belief and remain relevant to the central issues of the marketing campaign. In political campaigns, comparative ads work because “people have a cynical view of politics and tend to believe the negative very quickly,” says Farmer.

Though many Americans say they don’t like negative political ads, research by faculty members at the University of Georgia found that not only are attack ads initially effective, but their impact increases over time, perhaps because they produce an emotional response. And positive ads used to counter them are not as effective because they’re ultimately less powerful than the opponent’s attack ad.

A safer route is to skip the attack ads altogether and use implied comparisons. Avis doesn’t directly attack Hertz, they simply “try harder.” Wendy’s legendary “Where’s the Beef?” campaign never directly named McDonald’s or Burger King but humorously implied that other burgers were smaller. In response to Kmart’s campaign exhorting female customers to clip coupons, Wal-Mart adroitly ran spots showing busy women who had no time to clip coupons enjoying the convenience of low prices every day without them. No mudslinging necessary–just build a campaign around the comparative benefits of working with you, and your customers will make all the right connections.

But of course, the Republicans will not heed the high scenario–they mcu prefer the crap that does nothing to educate the voter.

About Had Enough Of McCain–Commentary

I have been reading on the stuff that legends are made, one John mcCain. He has been called by some as a “national hero” or a “patriot” and then others have not been so kind. I understand the idea behind the legend thingy—it is to get him elected. But I want to know what makes him a “national hero? Because he was a prisoner of war? Then what about those that were held with him in the Hanoi Hilton? Are they national heroes also? If so, without Google, name two of those who were released at the same time as McCain.

Now let us move on to the “patriot” title. What makes him a “patriot” where others are not? Could it be that he was in the military? If he wore a uniform, then he was a soldier, not necessarily a patriot. Is it because he serves in the Senate? That only makes him a politician, not patriot. With all the drama that has come out of Washington in the past and probably the future, I would say that they, Senators, are self-serving individuals; none I would consider patriots.

The hero thingy! Whenever we start labeling everyone as a hero, then you diminish the “real” heroes, who do heroic things. No one calls a trash man a hero for doing his job. So to label anyone performing a service for what they are paid for is nothing more than a PR campaign. Do not get me wrong, there are many people who do heroic deeds, but few are ever recognized. The soldier that dives onto a grenade to save his fellow soldiers, is definitely a hero. But because a person wears a certain uniform does not make them a hero.

McCain is a politician trying to win an election—nothing more than that. To imply anything else is just a lame attempt to create a cult of personality around him. But unfortunately, many Americans are prone to the worshipping at the alters of false “patriots and heroes”.

This candidate cannot remember how many houses he owns. He thinks that one is wealthy if they have over $5 miilion. Spends way too much time questioning another Americans patriotism. He has chosen negativity over a discussion on “real” issues. Just a short list of the many reasons I will not vote for McCain. For me Bullwinkle Moose is a better choice.

NOTE: Before I get a wealth of hate mail, let me say that I am not belittling McCain; I am however, belittling the use of labels to sell a person to the public. Peace! Out!

Do Negative Ads Really Work?

A piece I found on Politico written by Mark Penn….and he should know.

Clever negative advertising works. That is reality.

The tactic meets with media and pundit disapproval and spawns accusations of negativity, but the reality is that a clever negative ad can be devastatingly effective.

The 2008 presidential race is shaping up to be a close battle, and the tighter it is, the more the advertising will be ratcheted up, by both of the campaigns and the myriad independent groups sure to emerge.

Of course, voters publicly condemn negative advertising and suggest they would never be swayed by it. That was my experience in focus groups more than a decade ago, which found negative advertising to backfire. But Republican consultants such as the late Lee Atwater have used these tactics successfully in campaign after campaign. When reality and research differ, it is the research that is wrong.

Some negative ads crystallize voters’ opinions without presenting any new information. That’s what was behind John McCain’s recent ad equating Barack Obama’s celebrity status with that of Paris Hilton — that viewers would associate the Democrat’s leadership with mere celebrity, not substance. Fair or not, as advertising it did its job: It used humor, stuck viewers with memorable images and created a debate, just as Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 “Daisy” ad, Walter Mondale’s “Red Phone” spot 20 years later and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s “3 a.m.” commercial in 2008 did.
Other types of negative ads use candidates’ own words against them. During Bill Clinton’s 1996 campaign, we used to devastating effect the speeches that Republican nominee Bob Dole and House Speaker Newt Gingrich gave — especially a speech in which Gingrich admitted that his balanced budget plan aimed to cut off Medicare funds so the social insurance program would “wither on the vine.”

So far in the 2008 contest, neither candidate has connected with any ads that explosive. But fresh information about their past views in their own words could shake up the race.