Reply #34: Ah... successful but ironic [View All]

[salin]

Several reports after the Iowa caucuses featured voters who had been undecided.. but in the end selected Kerry (and some Edwards) due to the perception that this was a clean and positive campaign. However there have been reports for months (with now more being confirmed) that this has not been a clean campaign - but rather one of the dirtiest.. the primary distiction being that it runs a covert negative campaign (making it harder to combat). There is the irony.

Sorry to my eyes there has only been one major campaign that has resisted increasingly ugly tactics - that is the Clark campaign.

There were two (now only one) that have reportedly done very ugly behind the scenes work for months - under the cover of sending press items for "Background" with the expectation that though it was provided by a campaign that the campaign would not be mentioned (ergo it goes on the news not attached to candidate b and thus seen as "news" rather than had they worked the same charge into candidate b's speech - and then the charges would be read as less weighty and more political.)

Not a new tactic by any means. But it does make the campaigners look silly when doing this for months - while screaming bloody murder that their candidate is being unfairly slammed by another candidate. (eg the same slamming happening on both sides - but only one is visible.)

The first wind of these activities was heard back a number of months ago to a meeting with a key Kerry and key Gephardt campaign officials discussion how to work together to eliminate the common "threat" of Dean. Later a small group unaffiliated with any campaign - but that employes three people who had until recently been working with the Gep (2) and Kerry (1) campaigns run some particularly ugly/dirty ads - one in particular that is worthy of Lee Atwater.

And as oft reminded on these forums - another candidate when publically negative early on - the biggest distinction between these behaviors - overt vs covert. Personally I would rather see overt - as the charges made can be refuted by those who are charged... rather than doing so dishonestly then professing being squeakly clean.

The most amusing thing is when supporters of any of the major candidates (aside from Clark) call foul on the others - while completely neglecting their own ugly tactics. Imo, one campaign has demonstrated itself most capable on this front - but since it is just an opinion - I will keep that name and judgement to myself.

It could be a good thing on a pragmatic level. Perhaps a couple of these campaigns are prepared to out atwater the atwater protege, rove.