For some race in or around NYC, I’ve heard the following radio ad over and over. It’s the only one I’ve heard for this particular candidate.
Cue ominous music and deep male voice. Voice tells us that opponent claims to be pro-environment, but “lines his pockets” from a mutual fund (gasp!) that owns shares of Schlumberger Oil, which was fined $12million for something or other. Opponent claims to be for working families, but owns shares in a mutual fund that has shares of…WalMart. Various other mutual fund stocks (Pfizer?) from which he “reaps a windfall”. A couple of other mutual fund examples. Conclusion: “there’s a word for him: hypocrite”.
I guess nobody’s allowed to own an S&P index fund now?
If that’s the best this particular candidate can come up with, she’s pretty desperate.
We have one where the guy bashes the incumbent, saying he is supported by the Muslim American association. That, and that he voted for an NIH budget that included sex research, so he lists some tawdry details of the research and accuses the guy of supporting bizarre sex acts on teenage girls.
It had been fairly low-key until lately. And only one candidate has really gone low-ball. But we don’t have a senate race here.
This is a House race (she’s the Republican incumbent, although the word “Republican” apparently doesn’t appear on her Web site). Just checked, and here’s a bit of a description of the corrupt toady she’s running against:
“John Hall, an activist and musician who co-wrote the 1970’s hits “Dance With Me” and “Still the One” as a founder of the band Orleans…”
They are indeed sad (I thought the Arcuri phone-sex ad was the real low point) but the problem is this: they work. So then the question is this - is it unAmerican to suggest that most people are pretty stupid and liable to fall for these transparent entreaties, and that those who would use them are this close to morally bankrupt and certainly borne of incredible cynicism?
“is it unAmerican to suggest that most people are pretty stupid and liable to fall for these transparent entreaties, and that those who would use them are this close to morally bankrupt and certainly borne of incredible cynicism?”
I wouldn’t use the term “most” when talking about people who fall for these things. But I would say that there are “enough”, especially when the victor is usually less than 10 pts ahead of the loser.
I don’t have a problem with some negative ads. But when they go so far as to be intentionally misleading, then we get into the area of moral bankruptcy.
If I had my say, I would require each ad to be approved by the candidate. And if an independent panel finds that the ad is either factually incorrect or blatantly intentionally misleading, then a vote penalty is assessed. The arcuri ad is one, the NIH sex study ads are others.
Agreed…extremely lame. It seems to unfortunately be par for the course in American politics these days. Instead of trying to get people to vote for them, most politicians seem to be trying to convince the voter not to vote for the other guy.
My favorite( most pathetic) was the one that showed the guy in his hotel room, and claimed he dialed a porn number, and charged it to the people. What really happened ,was that an aid dialed the wrong area code, hung up in under a minute. He then called the same exact number, right area code, but instead of being porn, it was a completely legit call to a gov agency. THat is about as low as you can get, knowing that there was no basis for the attack ad, but using it anyway. It eventually got pulled when the light was shown on it, and I believe it is now backfiring on them for using it…
I heard one on the radio the other day that was a real ad doing a spoof ad accusing a republican candidate of being pro neo-nazi/skinhead/white supremicist.
The ad played goofy music with a voiceover that discussed all the white supremacists that were showing up at Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo’s rallies, and that he must therefore be a white supremicist. Then, a new announcer comes on and says “While this ad is just a spoof, and clearly Mr. Tancredo is not a white supremacist, the underlying facts are not. White supremacist and other racist groups are attending all of his rallies. So what must his message be to attract these kinds of people?”
Completely shameless and lame. Basically, “ha ha! Tom Tancredo’s a racist… Not really… but he really is!”
Now… I don’t endorse or revile Tom Tancredo. In fact, he’s not even my representative, so I can’t vote for or against him. But that kind of negative advertisement is ridiculous.
C’mon Steve, you know you love the Marilyn Musgrave/Angie Piccione commercials where they don’t get caught up in the facts and only say “Angie/Marilyn doesn’t want to talk about the facts. I do. I’m Angie/Marilyn and I approve this message because the truth needs to be told”. Its like they have the same advertising manager and didn’t realize it until too late. Also cracks me up that they never say what truth it is that they are telling, just that they are telling it.
Too bad I don’t hold a vote in that election either.
Ah yes… the Paccione/Musgrave fight… I don’t get to vote in that one, either. Another good radio ad was anti-Musgrave. It consists of a background of pig gruntings and squealings while talking about how greedy Musgrave is and how much she’s taken from lobbyists in Washington. Every once in a while you hear a person (supposedly Musgrave) say “I want more!!! Give me more!!!”
There is a race here where 1 candidate appears to be running on a platform based upon his recent weight loss. Not exactly sure what that has to do with being insurance commissioner.
I saw that one too, he is running in what looks like a race, but when you look close, his number is #1. Definately a staged shot. And his slogan is something like if I can lose weight, then I can be trusted to stick to something…Really funny, and he is still fat…
There are some ads by his opponent accusing him of corruption, and he answers them with “look how much weight I’ve lost”. Interesting. He hasn’t said he didn’t take $$. Maybe he used his ill gotten gains to pay Jenny Craig.
I think any attack ad that starts running in the last days of the campaign, when there is really no time to effectively respond is chicken shit. I would like to see a candidate respond with a fist-fight. That would make for better TV than the lame election night speeches.
“John Hall, an activist and musician who co-wrote the 1970’s hits “Dance With Me” and “Still the One” as a founder of the band Orleans…”
Ahhh, memories of the Edmonton Oilers glory days in the 80’s. “Still The One” being their goal song!
We have a VERY liberal candidate who is getting torn up with his lies backed by video proof and his only response has been saying the incumbent “rubber stamps” everything Bush does. Now some of you Bush haters may think that’s great but when confronted with video evidence of your lies you have to do better then that!
I must have missed those… i only saw the ones that said how the candidate opposed abortion, went hunting regularly, and wants to bring God into politics.