Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Political Tuesdays - Down to the Wire

Well, it's down to the wire and the negative ad campaigns are making me sick. I guess politicians think that most Americans are too stupid to know what's going on. I hear that statistically, that in fact may be true. So, what does a guy like me, who checks this stuff out on more than MSNBC, NPR, Fox, the Times, the Globe (actually it is becoming a pay site - how irrelevant!), the Post and the WSJ, do?

All you have to do is Google "negative ads" and you'll see how effective they in fact might be.

Most of it is severe distortions - - in the case of Rand Paul, kinda true with a twist. You won't believe this!

It appears from Internet sources (which are always true), that Rand went to Baylor and was apart of a “secret” society, that everyone knows about, called the NoZe Brotherhood (possibly very profane). The NoZe basically do various pranks around campus and put out a satirical newspaper called The Rope – which is very much like The Onion. The Rope is a play on the fact that the school newspaper is called The Lariat. What the ad refers to is this satirical newspaper, which is always a point of humor around campus – and no one would take anything in that paper seriously.

But I do think it is cool that the opposition put up all these fake web sites.... not including Aqua Buddha.

It kind of makes me wish that professional politicians weren't allowed to go to college.

I prefer debates - well, if you like hostile ones. Here is a review of the Bielat vs. Barney Frank debate.

How about you, what do you think of negative advertising?


Anonymous said...

Negative ads work. That's why you see them. In politics, they work better when a third party releases them, rather than the opponent. Then, the opponent can spread their hands and say, "I don't coordinate with the SEIU or Chamber of Commerce, so I have no say over those ads. Perhaps my opponent would have something to say about those charges".

Here's a link to six brutal ads in the recent cycle. The comment thread is also interesting (note that it's from a progressive blog, so caveat emptor).


There's a lot of disagreement among Democrats whether the Aqua-Buddha ad is over the top.

In the end, what works will get reused.

Anonymous said...

FactCheck.org (which has high degree of accuracy) has verified that most of the Aqua Buddha ad content is true. The source is the young woman in question.

Anonymous said...

“Follow the money” was the informant Deep Throat’s advice to Watergate journalist Bob Woodward. This year, the majority of political media money spent comes from “Third parties” (as opposed to the candidates and their political parties). Thanks to the Supreme’s ruling on the Citizen’s United case, these 3rd parties can collect money and spend it with very limited reporting on who has given that money, and almost no oversight on fact checking.
Here’s one example:
A few weeks ago, a group called Concerned Taxpayers of America emerged out of nowhere and started to spend large sums of money attacking Rep. Peter DeFazio (D) in his re-election bid in Oregon. At the time, both DeFazio and his opponent, Tea Party favorite Art Robinson, claimed complete ignorance of the group, and DeFazio even tracked it to a townhouse in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington to demand that the group identify itself — but to no avail.

Friday’s FEC filings, however, finally reveal that the Concerned Taxpayers of America consists of exactly two concerned taxpayers:

Daniel G. Schuster Inc., an Owings Mills, Md., concrete firm, gave two donations to the group totaling $300,000, new disclosure records show. New York hedge fund executive Robert Mercer gave the group $200,000.

And that’s the extent of the financial support reported by Concerned Taxpayers, which says it was formed in September “to engage citizens from every walk of life and political affiliation” in the fight against “runaway spending.”

The group has since expanded its advertising attacks to include Rep. Frank Kratovil, Jr. (D-Md.), but its motives remain as opaque as ever. With as many donors as political targets, however, the group serves as an excellent example of how wealthy donors and corporations can now single-handedly fund a political group with an anodyne name that can attack a candidate under the guise of a broad public — rather than private — interest.

Charlie Chang said...

Negative ads do work. I think deep down inside we like seeing drama in other people's life because we can justify our own sin.

"See, at least I'm not like that guy."


photogr said...

Ah Political campaigns. Don't you just love the smoke screens that are thrown up?

Related Posts with Thumbnails