Unearthing and revealing contrast material?

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

I heard this used today as an alternative expression to "going negative" in a campaign.

Isn't that the cutest? Man, spin doctors will spin. I wonder who came up with that phrase?

I guess now that it's out there, we can all use it. "Bashing? I was simply unearthing and revealing contrast material."

[portlander23]

1. Contrast Material

I think it's perfectly fair to present candidates statements and positions. What made the Correct the Record attack particularly egregious was the implication that Mr. Sanders in cutting a deal to provide heating oil to poorer residents of Vermont made some sort of blanket endorsement of Hugo Chavez.

That's whats offensive. What's worse is that the group was caught and declined to apologize, and has the very ironic name "Correct the Record".

[99th_Monkey]

2. Obviously Correct the Record could find nothing to "correct"

so they resorted to name-calling and guilt-by-association. And
the hypocrisy has not gone un-noticed by the voting public.

On edit: oh AND it generated $1.2 Million within 48 hours for Bernie's
campaign coffers from the 99%.

Woot! Go Bernie!

[portlander23]

3. Yep

It has certainly backfired. I think the real question is will they get caught again? I think the lesson learned for the group in this case is make sure you're on the record.

[delrem]

4. Hugo Chavez, my friend, is a democratic socialist par excellence in the Americas.

He of course might have made some mistakes - and let's sheathe our knives here - because there's hardly anyone who could find it in their heart to say that Hugo Chavez wasn't a man and politician of good will. A man of peace who did a lot of good.

I'm just sayin'

[portlander23]

5. Chavez

I don't have any particular animosity towards Chavez. I'm sure he's done stuff I wouldn't agree with, but as far as I know he was elected. Still, the implication that Mr. Sanders is affiliated with him in some way is patently false regardless of Mr. Chavez' record.

It was a slimy red baiting tactic that blew up in the Clinton campaign's face. They ought to be better than that.

[delrem]

7. Of course it was slimy. That's the nature of the thing.

I'm happy that you don't have particular animosity toward Chavez.

Many of us on "the political left" consider Chavez to be somewhat of a hero. He did a LOT of good. He broke down walls.

So I figure that David Brock should shove it up his ass. Back to where it belongs.

[portlander23]

8. Nationalizations

The only real knowledge of have of Mr. Chavez is his nationalization of resources, which I fully support. Beyond that I can't say I've followed his career that much. I was surprised that Mr. Sanders reacted quite so negatively, calling him a "dead communist dictator". Either way, the association made was clearly not factual.

Mr. Sanders has not been shy of attacking Mrs. Clinton with her own words, but in no case has he made any attempt to portray her as holding positions she did not take. So regardless of Mr. Chavez' history, it's somewhat tangental to the slight.

[delrem]

13. Well, I totally disagree with any characterization of Hugo Chavez

as a "dead communist dictator".

Just speaking from instinct, here - since I am somewhat apprised of the history of Hugo Chavez' rule as democratically elected president of Venezuela. As should anybody who cares a fuck about what is going on in North and South America, in these times.

[tularetom]

6. Ms Clinton has made some godawful choices for her campaign staff

It appears that she has loaded her team with sycophants and ass kissers. David Brock is just the most recent example.

In 2008 she hired a bunch of people who told her what she wanted to hear instead of the what she needed to hear. We all saw the results.

If her judgement in campaign aides is so poor, why should we have any confidence that her judgement in the selection of cabinet members, white house staff, even SCOTUS justices would be any better?

[delrem]

9. She went out and chose those people.

She hired David Brock because she liked what she saw of him, when he was attacking her and her husband. She just went right out and bought him - to do to her political opponents what he did to her. Cut and dried - reduced to the essence.

[tularetom]

10. So Mr Brock will say whatever he's paid to say - by the highest bidder

There's a word for that and it says all we need to know about him.

But what does it say about the people who hire him?

That's my point - very poor choices.

[delrem]

11. He's very good at it. An innovator. An expert.

He's now Hillary's man.

But then consider. Robert Kagan of all people is now Hillary's man, also.

Hillary comes with a lot of people. She comes with a team, although she's not always up front in saying who they are.

[HooptieWagon]

12. Exactly.

There is zero confidence she would appoint competent Cabinet Secretaries, staff, or even Judges. Her campaign hires and associations with the likes of Kissinger and The Family are ample proof.

[djean111]

14. How could I support a candidate who inspires their supporters to spew the lies and smears,

while shrieking NO FAIR!!!!! when an actual issue is brought up? I cannot.