527 ads

[yeartolate]

After the conventions, the 527 adswill go into full swing.

Of course they are not required to have the endorsement of the candidate.

THe most famous (infamous) would be the Swift Boat Ads
Most of the men maing comments never had served with Kerry. Many who served with Kerry were on record as valuing his service.

Certainly on the Democratic side, Moveon.org has had some less than stellar tactics.

I am just sick of this behavior.

Frankly, having attack groups do your dirty work while you sit on your ivory tower is cowardly. I would have great respect for any canidate (either side) who would publicly decry the tactics and the commercials when they show up.

I think alot of these dirty tactics have alot to do with the post election smears that go on once the new folks take office. If they got there because of dirty tactics and not the strength and value of their beliefs, it is never felt by the "other side" that the race was won fair and square.

For example (and by the way, there are multiple examples on BOTH sides of the aisle)- the Swift Boat ads went on and on. There was alot of information out there to discredit the swiftboaters -i.e. inferring that they may have actually physically served with Kerry. His military record was clear. If all the ads said was essentially that he should'nt have protested when he came back - cool. The other stuff was not . How would we feel if our current soldiers were discredited like this? (assuming they were not involved in things like Abu-Ghraib) Bush came out at some point and made note that Kerry's service should be honored. But the Swiftboat ads seemed to only escalate after that.

Does a candidate have any moral responsibility to insist that the 527 ads are reflective of the truth?

 

[yeartolate]

Sorry the question got cut off.


Does a candidate have any moral responsibility to insist that the 527 ads are reflective of the truth?

 

[akhenaten]

I believe they do.......

 

[Cantw8]

yes, I think they do. These types of ads are nothing more than yellow journalism

 

[slruud]

Do you think MoveOn.org...should read BowelMovement.org....really cares what the truth is???

 

[richiebaseball]

Do you think MoveOn.org...should read BowelMovement.org....really cares what the truth is???

I could be mistaken, I certainly have been before, however I believe the OP was referencing all 527 ads and not just those on one side or the other.

Unless you believe that only the 527 ads from the "other" side are bad in which case I need to induct you into the "You're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" club (henceforth known as the YNPOTSYPOTP club) and send you to bed without supper.

 

[yeartolate]

I could be mistaken, I certainly have been before, however I believe the OP was referencing all 527 ads and not just those on one side or the other.

Unless you believe that only the 527 ads from the "other" side are bad in which case I need to induct you into the "You're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" club (henceforth known as the YNPOTSYPOTP club) and send you to bed without supper.

I wholeheartedly include the dirty dealing on both sides. I thought I made that abundently clear. I named moveon.org by name.

 

[slruud]

I could be mistaken, I certainly have been before, however I believe the OP was referencing all 527 ads and not just those on one side or the other.

Unless you believe that only the 527 ads from the "other" side are bad in which case I need to induct you into the "You're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" club (henceforth known as the YNPOTSYPOTP club) and send you to bed without supper.

Well I do want supper, but how does one judge the effect of these ads until after they come out. Seems to me they are aimed at small minded people who can be influenced by something trivial. If I recall correctly, didn't both candidates in '04 distance themselves from these ads, but not too vehemently?

 

[Charade]

McCain/Feingold sucks.

 

[yeartolate]

Well I do want supper, but how does one judge the effect of these ads until after they come out. Seems to me they are aimed at small minded people who can be influenced by something trivial. If I recall correctly, didn't both candidates in '04 distance themselves from these ads, but not too vehemently?

Kerry denounced the ad's questioning Bush's VIet Nam Era service. THey seemed to evaporate pretty quickly (but that might be different in less lberal areas of the US)

I do recall Bush denounced 527 ads general, but indicated he was not affiliated with Swift Boat group. The Swift Boat folks came up with new spots that were just as bad - and the frequency escalated.
Where the Swift boat folks are concerned, I would have had no problem with them taking issue with Kerry's protests as long as real unadulterated photos were used and the truth was told. I take EXTREME issue with folks implying that they were shipmates and saying that his medals were trummped up.

 

[JARNJ3]

Yes - the candidate should denounce them - but sometimes that one showing is all it takes.

The Swiftboaters ad was shown very few times. The cable news networks took it and showed them over and over again for free! - under the guise of "discussing whether they had merit."

I expect this year's 527s to be equally as nasty.

 

[JARNJ3]

Kerry denounced the ad's questioning Bush's VIet Nam Era service. THey seemed to evaporate pretty quickly (but that might be different in less lberal areas of the US)

I do recall Bush denounced 527 ads general, but indicated he was not affiliated with Swift Boat group. The Swift Boat folks came up with new spots that were just as bad - and the frequency escalated.
Where the Swift boat folks are concerned, I would have had no problem with them taking issue with Kerry's protests as long as real unadulterated photos were used and the truth was told. I take EXTREME issue with folks implying that they were shipmates and saying that his medals were trummped up.

Right - Bush had his cake and ate it too. He denounced the ad - but the ad had its desired effect - it brought into question Kerry's service - which then equalized out Bush's lack of service during that time period.

It was unfortunately a brilliant stroke of political maneuvering.

 

[wvrevy]

McCain/Feingold sucks.

You're right...it didn't go nearly far enough!

Right - Bush had his cake and ate it too. He denounced the ad - but the ad had its desired effect - it brought into question Kerry's service - which then equalized out Bush's lack of service during that time period.

It was unfortunately a brilliant stroke of political maneuvering.

Exactly. If he'd come out and denounced the ads with the same language that Kerry used and simply told people to ignore people trying to smear his opponent rather than talking about the issues, I'd have had a little more respect for him.

Something funny seems to be happening right now, though. In this campaign for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton's campaign has gone "negative" - and by that I mean attacking the opponent, rather than talking about her accomplishments - three times: before South Carolina, before Super Tuesday (remember the last debate John Edwards took part in?), and in Wisconsin. The results? She lost South Carolina, and has been losing ground ever since, leading up to a blowout 17 point loss in Wisconsin.

Now, I do NOT want to get into a debate about the primary campaign here, so please don't go there (there are plenty of other threads we can do that on ). My point is, it seems that the American public may be getting tired of this kind of nonsense.

 

[JARNJ3]

You're right...it didn't go nearly far enough!



Exactly. If he'd come out and denounced the ads with the same language that Kerry used and simply told people to ignore people trying to smear his opponent rather than talking about the issues, I'd have had a little more respect for him.

Something funny seems to be happening right now, though. In this campaign for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton's campaign has gone "negative" - and by that I mean attacking the opponent, rather than talking about her accomplishments - three times: before South Carolina, before Super Tuesday (remember the last debate John Edwards took part in?), and in Wisconsin. The results? She lost South Carolina, and has been losing ground ever since, leading up to a blowout 17 point loss in Wisconsin.

Now, I do NOT want to get into a debate about the primary campaign here, so please don't go there (there are plenty of other threads we can do that on ). My point is, it seems that the American public may be getting tired of this kind of nonsense.

I won't go there. but.......

I don't believe that the American public EVER liked negative ads - but they unfortunately work! They stick in people's memory banks -those that don't have party affiliations - those that don't do their homework and only remember the accusation.......

Now - with the advent of TiVo and DVRs - I think alot of those negative ads aren't being heard to work...... but time will tell.

I'll say one other thing (can't help myself) - I don't think its nearly as negative yet that it will get in October.......

 

[wvrevy]

I won't go there. but.......

I don't believe that the American public EVER liked negative ads - but they unfortunately work! They stick in people's memory banks -those that don't have party affiliations - those that don't do their homework and only remember the accusation.......

Now - with the advent of TiVo and DVRs - I think alot of those negative ads aren't being heard to work...... but time will tell.

I'll say one other thing (can't help myself) - I don't think its nearly as negative yet that it will get in October.......

I don't know. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I honestly think I'm starting to detect a trend of backlash against negative campaigning.

As for what happens later in the general...see, I have lost a TON of respect for John McCain in the last few years, but I don't think for a second he would pull a "swift boat" kind of campaign trick on the Democratic nominee. Oh, there will definitely be 527's trying to run smear campaigns, but if McCain is half the man he was back when he was legitimately trying to clean up Washington and passing the most comprehensive ethics reform bill that had been passed at that point, then he won't sit quietly while someone smears his opponent. I honestly think that the McCain back then would have been legitimately outraged if someone did that, and I think even the current McCain would stand up and say "Stop". Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Charade]

You're right...it didn't go nearly far enough!

Huh? You think it was a good piece of legislation?

 

[wvrevy]

Huh? You think it was a good piece of legislation?

"Good"? I don't know if I'd go quite THAT far. It was worlds better than anything we had until then, though.

 

[JARNJ3]

I don't know. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I honestly think I'm starting to detect a trend of backlash against negative campaigning.

As for what happens later in the general...see, I have lost a TON of respect for John McCain in the last few years, but I don't think for a second he would pull a "swift boat" kind of campaign trick on the Democratic nominee. Oh, there will definitely be 527's trying to run smear campaigns, but if McCain is half the man he was back when he was legitimately trying to clean up Washington and passing the most comprehensive ethics reform bill that had been passed at that point, then he won't sit quietly while someone smears his opponent. I honestly think that the McCain back then would have been legitimately outraged if someone did that, and I think even the current McCain would stand up and say "Stop". Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Yes, we'll have to wait and see. McCain, like Bush, also weakly denounced the swiftboaters - but if they really were against it - they would have DEMANDED that ad be taken down. Instead - it went on......

As they say - time will tell.......