Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:11 PM
Original message |
Question: It seems like Hillary does BETTER when she stays away from attack ads... |
|
and focuses on the positives of her campaign as opposed to the negatives of Obama. With that in mind, why is she going hard negative? I'd think that, with her campaign in a tight spot, she'd want to AVOID the strategy that has hurt her up to this point, and stick with the one that has gotten her actual results. I'm just wondering, then: why the continued focus on negative campaigning?
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:16 PM
Response to Original message |
1. One Clinton aide said, to paraphrase, "The bright side is that his negatives |
|
have nowhere to go but up". Hillary's campaign is going to keep trying to pull him down, until the superdelegates no longer are sure he's the most electable compared to Hillary.
|
Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. I sincerely hope that's not how it plays out. |
|
I've said I'll vote for Hillary if she wins, but if she decides to run a campaign that dirty, pulling out all the stops to win...It'll be very very painful for me to vote for her.
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. They're going to either give up and hope that a final positive message works, or |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-20-08 06:23 PM by wienerdoggie
try to take him out at the knees and cripple him for the general McCain matchup, in a very nasty, specific way. So that they can then turn to the supers and say, we can't run him--look, his poll numbers are going down. He'd be a disaster.
edit to add: They've admitted already they're not targeting voters now, they're targeting the SD's.
|
stahbrett
(855 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:17 PM
Response to Original message |
|
She seems to have done best in (a) home states, (b) states where no campaigning happened, (c) states where only her name on the ballot (and Kucinich, to head off that reply), and (d) states where her opponents did not have as much time to campaign (due to compressed election scheduling).
|
Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:19 PM
Original message |
I think she'd do better to not listen to Penn and Wolfson... |
|
they're going to drive her campaign straight off a cliff.
|
scheming daemons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:19 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Which is why she'll continue to go negative... |
|
....because her campaign, at every step of the way, continues to do the exact opposite thing that common sense would indicate needs to be done.
She's running the Bizarro-World campaign.
|
Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. I'm starting to wonder...haha... |
sniffa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:22 PM
Response to Original message |
5. and also, with the increasing numbers on my ignore list |
|
she does conversely, poorly in the primaries/caucuses. I recommend they both keep it up. :thumbsup:
|
Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. A Chris Matthews style 'HA!' |
Adelante
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:24 PM
Response to Original message |
|
She is doing a bang up job for us.
|
Danger Mouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-20-08 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. LOL...sorry. I don't want to give Wolfson any GOOD ideas, do I? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:42 AM
Response to Original message |