Obama's Political Ads: Study Shows 1 Out of Every 10 are Negative

[Pangloss]

If Obama is being attacked, and he avoids making retaliatory attacks (like negative ads of his own toward the other side), how is he supposed to defend himself? If you take the option of discussing authentically the Republican attack machine off of the table, what other responses does he have at his disposal to negate the impact such negative ads have on the populace?

 

Well first off Obama needs to be more careful about what he starts. If McCain is playing from the bottom of the deck (and I agree with you on this), then Obama is all too often handing him the cards. That needs to stop, and I'm sure the Obama campaign is well aware of this and regards that particular line as a mistake (which as I pointed out earlier is why it didn't show up when the speech was posted to the donations page on their web site).

 

But in answer to your (very good, IMO) question, that's what his aides are for. They can get down in the mud while the candidates stays safely above the fray. He already does this, just as all politicians do; I'm just suggesting putting the high water mark at a slightly different place.

 

If what you say is true that McCain is undermining himself with these attacks, then -- let him. If Obama steps down to his level he actually elevates that mud to a higher plane (under the basic premise that if it wasn't important then both candidates wouldn't be talking about it). Wouldn't Obama obviously do that (ignore him) if McCain were to, say, let slip the N word? Of course he would -- he wouldn't directly respond to that, nor should he. We don't need to have a national conversation about the use of the N word, we need to have one about race.

 

So instead of berating the Republican attack machine over its stealthy racism, which many undeclared voters will not see as racism but instead see as "a good question", he should instead take the opportunity to talk about race relations in America. That's how it's done. That's how you elevate the debate. That's how politicians do it, when they're playing it smart.

 

(Mind you, I don't personally think he should be leading a discussion on race relations either, because I personally don't feel a need to be lectured about race relations by politicians, who are, as a group, largely responsible for the problem int he first place. But I'm not a typical voter, and that IS how you win people over.)

 

But listen, just to add a humble caveat, if I knew better than Obama's political advisers then perhaps I'd be in D.C. right now telling him what to do. So hey, I could well be wrong, and he's playing it exactly right. We'll find out eventually.

 

---

line[/hr]

 

BTW, let McCain do stuff like this:

 

 

That won't convince a single moderate voter, that's just eye candy for right-wing partisans. Granted it will bring in some cash, but that's it. Most people who matter know better. The ones who might vote for Obama, but haven't made up their minds yet? The ones who will actually DECIDE this election? They won't fall for that. They just will not.

Edited August 5, 2008 by Pangloss

[iNow]

If what you say is true that McCain is undermining himself with these attacks, then -- let him.

To be honest, I think I have a fear in the back of my mind that these low brow things are precisely what America wants to see and hear. I'm not worried about McCain making himself look bad to me, I'm worried about these tactics making him look good to the people who barely pay attention, but who vote in droves.

 

I dunno. Your point is quite good. This election is less about the base and more about the independents and undecideds, so these tire gauge tactics really do hurt McCain more. Another point on which we agree, Obama needs to wisen up quick and stop offering them such slow under-hand pitches to swing at. That's where his "lack of experience" truly comes into it. It's not that he can't set great policy or bring wonderous change or secure the nation... it's that he'll step too easily into traps like these and pay the price (and get put off course from the actual goal(s) being sought).

 

However, I think he's a quick study, so we'll see what happens. My dad taught me growing up that it was perfectly okay to make mistakes. He said they give an opportunity to learn, and you're only truly at fault if you repeat it more than once. I just hope Obama's dad taught him something similar.

 

 

So instead of berating the Republican attack machine over its stealthy racism, which many undeclared voters will not see as racism but instead see as "a good question", he should instead take the opportunity to talk about race relations in America. That's how it's done. That's how you elevate the debate. That's how politicians do it, when they're playing it smart.

 

<cough>How quickly we forget</cough>

 

 

 

[bascule]

Well yes, and if Joseph Stalin were in charge we wouldn't have any gridlock at all. We have two parties for a reason, bascule. They wouldn't have any gridlock right now if they were passing laws that both sides of the aisle agreed upon.

 

Okay, perhaps I was being too subtle: Bush is the source of a lot of the gridlock. I guess you want to get all flippant about making a "partisan" point, however neither Bush nor neoconservativism are representative of the Republican party. Unfortunately, there are many Republicans who may disagree with Bush but aren't willing to vote for a veto override. That's some real "partisan" politics for ya.

[Pangloss]

However, I think he's a quick study, so we'll see what happens. My dad taught me growing up that it was perfectly okay to make mistakes. He said they give an opportunity to learn, and you're only truly at fault if you repeat it more than once. I just hope Obama's dad taught him something similar.

 

<cough>How quickly we forget</cough>

 

 

 

I agree, and yes, that speech is a perfect example. It also underscores the problem, in that he hasn't talked that way in several months now. It's kind of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, because he was asked to be less "inspirational" and more specific about policy, but when he did that look what happened. But as you say, he's learning from his mistakes, which is inspirational for a whole different reason.

 

I grow increasingly embarrassed about my 2004 John Kerry vote. (chuckle) Though I still think it was still the better of the two options at the time. Oh well.

 

 

Unfortunately, there are many Republicans who may disagree with Bush but aren't willing to vote for a veto override. That's some real "partisan" politics for ya.

 

I agree with this. They had a complete lock on political direction in this country, and they squandered it in the mistaken belief that the 80% of this country that is Christian equated to a mandate for them to become ultra-conservative in policy.

 

We had a "conversation" with them about it, you might say. I think they got the message.

[iNow]

I really have to admit, Paris Hilton has earned a bit respect from me on this response. It was a good video. Well done, madam... well done, indeed.

 

 

http://zenoferox.blogspot.com/2008/08/paris-hilton-outs-herself.html

[ParanoiA]

I really have to admit, Paris Hilton has earned a bit respect from me on this response. It was a good video. Well done, madam... well done, indeed.

 

 

http://zenoferox.blogspot.com/2008/08/paris-hilton-outs-herself.html

 

I can't help it, I've always liked Paris Hilton. Why? Not because she's a dumb blonde type (I'm not buying the whole act anyway), but because she's a dumb blonde type that doesn't try to actually share a serious opinion and pretend as if she's qualified to lecture the american sheeple like other celebrity idiots.

 

This commercial is funny and carries no serious political message. It's great. She just relishes the role of village idiot - well "hot" village idiot - and doesn't pretend to be anything more. I like that attitude.

[bascule]

It had a message: McCain is an asshole.

[Pangloss]

Amusing. Seems a bit above her pay grade.

 

Unfortunately the Constitution has an age requirement that she does not appear to meet.

 

(Though if you need someone to take a closer look, I'm available!)

[john5746]

I don't think she is a good actress, so I believe the dumb blonde 'act'. It was a smart rebuttal though - she didn't go pro Obama, just pro Paris. She is adept at making lemonade out of lemons - or should I say getting others to make her lemonade out of lemons!