What is it that makes a negative ad..a negative ad?

[Peacetrain]

I was listening to one of the stations last night, and they were commenting on the fact that since the republican convention Obama has been running more negative ads than McCain.

While glossing over the non stop negative attacks of the summer run by the McCain camp against Obama, they were shocked, and talking in whispers of how we would be surprised to find out who i running the most negative ads. (Yes it was CNN)

Well then I find out what constitutes a negative ad, in another story run on the same station. Just mentioning the name of your opponent in your ad is what makes it a negative ad? WHAT the heck??

So McCain can attack Obama as the opponent, mock him, etc, and if he does not use his name it is not a negative ad?

But if Obama say my opponent John McCain that is what constitutes a negative ad.

Can this be right?

[Curtland1015]

1. It's more about tone than actual facts...

McCain could come out with an ad saying "puppies are cute" (it's true, they are!!!) and that would be a positive ad, even if John McCain didn't in fact like puppies.

Obama could come out with an ad saying McCain called his wife a c*nt, and it would be TRUE, but it would still be negative.

It's more about the difference between talking yourself up and dressing your opponent down.

[Peacetrain]

2. Yep that is what I thought, but

the story on how negative ads were identified, was if the opponents name was used in the ad. Then it was a negative ad? I just realize, I did not put that in my original op. That that is how they identify negative ads. Just floored me.. Think I better edit that op

[Diamonique]

11. The way I heard it yesterday...

... wasn't just that your opponent's name was mentioned in the ad. It was that the ad is about your opponent.

I personally don't agree with that either. I think if the ad is about your opponent in a way that discredits him, but not mean and nasty.. just simply telling the truth, I don't call that negative.

But the nasty, mean, lying, innuendo kinda ad about your opponent is, IMO, a negative ad.

[Peacetrain]

12. Its is a confusing thing to me..

that if you reply to a negative ad, then you are negative too.. maybe more so..?? convoluted thinking

[Lakerstan]

3. If it's about your guy, it's negative. If it's by your guy, it's not. n/t

[libodem]

4. I'm not sure what all is entailed

but it seems to me it is a lot of lies that are difficult to refute. If they are not refuted then they stand. We have one playing on TV around here that starts out ...'She said no to the bridge to nowhere' and just goes on and on, from there. It isn't even an attack ad against Barack, per se, but it is full of misinformation. Back in the day, after I was divorced with 2 toddlers and a new baby I was on welfare for a couple of years. I read a LTTE that made me so angry that I spent many hours trying to compose a coherent answer in reply. I never finished it because there was so much emotional rhetoric that was blatantly untrue I kept getting lost in the particulars. More or less it was how welfare mothers just got paid to sit around the house not working, letting the kids run wild, while supporting a bum of a boyfriend, who moved in to live off the dole while they stayed drunk and did drugs. How does one find facts to address a bunch of hooey like that?

[RoadRage]

5. I know.. it's skewed..

McCain can say "Obama is for teaching 5 year olds about sex" and that is a negative ad vs. Obama saying "McCain voted for X,Y & Z Bill" which would be totally factually true - but is "equal" with the McCain ad.

So they don't rate the amount that the ad is false mixed with the negativism. Stating that your opponent supports somthing is still just as negative as them bald face lying.

Total crap if you ask me. All the way around Obama's TONE has been much more positive and issue focused then McCain.. and that can't be argued. Well, it can be (and will be) but the people arguing that McCain has been less coniving are lying assholes.. and worse then Rove, because even HE knows it's been a stretch.

[votetastic]

6. What constitutes a negative ad? In a nutshell...

If the ad is made by Republicans:

LIES


If the ad is made by Democrats:

TRUTH

[stillcool]

9. that is how it looks to me...

one side lies and smears and does not get taken to task for it and it is considered negative, while the other side points out the facts and that is considered the same thing.

[Peacetrain]

10. That is exactly it.. If Obama responds to the negative ads that McCain does..

and points out why they are wrong, then he is running a negative campaign , and they try to make them comparable, or worse yet.. Obama is more negative than McCain.. AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEE

[goodgd_yall]

7. I heard that and I don't agree with the simplistic definition

A negative ad isn't just against your opponent--it preys on emotional issues of people. I would say the ad McCain ran about Obama supporting sex education in school was a negative ad. It has to be on the slimey side to be negative.

[liberalpress]

8. The difference is simple

A campaign ad says "Vote for ME"

A negative campaign ad says "Don't vote that other guy"

[renie408]

13. 'Here's what I will do'...positive. "Here's what he did"...negative. n/t