I've heard so many TV campaign ads this year... And they do absolutely nothing other than bash the opponent.

 

I know everything Ken Lucas is for and against, but I don't even think I know his opponent's name? When you mention your opponent more in your ads than you mention yourself and your beliefs, it's a setup for disaster.

How can you not know his opponent's name when he is the sitting congressman for your district? :confused:

I am getting a big kick out of the Mike Sodrel ads here in Louisville that say in effect "That no good homosexual loving, flag burner I'm running against is waging a negative campaign."

Things like negative campaigning is what turns away the young people, like myself, away from voting at all. I, and so many others, get so turned off by the politicians now a days that I don't even consider voting by either candidate for any position.

Some are pretty funny though. Like the one with people walking up to this bush growing in a field and asking vaeious questions.....and the punch line was something like " Did you really think you could ever get an answer from a bush." LOL

How can you not know his opponent's name when he is the sitting congressman for your district? :confused:

 

I should've worded that better... What I meant was that from the ads, you really don't know who it is they're promoting.

I should've worded that better... What I meant was that from the ads, you really don't know who it is they're promoting.

:thumb:

A candidate in a local judicial race came around handing out flyers last weekend. The flyer was the transcript of a disciplinary order against his opponent. It went into the trash along with his chances for my vote. Tell me what you can do, not what your opponent has done.

 

Totally agree. It is so easy to say what your oppenent has done or hasn't done, but what are you going to do, that's what I want to know.

I think the polarization of the electorate has a lot to do with it. You have one side that will vote for their party no matter what, and the other side will vote for their party no matter what. The negative campaign ads are targeting the "undecided" in order to scare them away from "their' opponent. With negative campaigning, there is no need to have a strong platform as long as you can convince the "undecided" voter not to vote for your opponent.

I think the polarization of the electorate has a lot to do with it. You have one side that will vote for their party no matter what, and the other side will vote for their party no matter what. The negative campaign ads are targeting the "undecided" in order to scare them away from "their' opponent. With negative campaigning, there is no need to have a strong platform as long as you can convince the "undecided" voter not to vote for your opponent.

I disagree.

 

I think my generation is more willing to jump the fence than my father and his father's. My father went straight Democratic ticket this year on his absentee ballot. As a registered Democrat, I voted Republican for President, Independent for Representive while Democratic for local races.

If what the opponent says is true, is it really negative campaigning or is it just truthful advertising? I mean, if a candidate did vote himself a raise, or vote to give illegal aliens voting rights, or ran a nursing home that was cited by the state for violations, it IS the truth after all....

If what the opponent says is true, is it really negative campaigning or is it just truthful advertising? I mean, if a candidate did vote himself a raise, or vote to give illegal aliens voting rights, or ran a nursing home that was cited by the state for violations, it IS the truth after all....

Or a variation of the truth.

 

Did Geoff Davis vote himself a payraise after only 6 months? Technically, yes.

 

But did he get the raise because his position is included with a raise for all of the federal government employees.

 

I believe what is implied but not said changes on whether it is actually the truth or not.

 

The image the commercial I saw leads you to believe is that the Congress passed a bill that ONLY gave themselves raises. They have people from the "real world" saying, "I didn't get a raise last year, why should he?" And that is far from the truth.

I can see that point and really haven't educated myself on the Davis race because it's in another part of the state. But in western Kentucky, we're overflowed with commercials for the Tennessee senate race between Harold Ford and Bob Corker that has been a knock down, drag out in commercials. As has a Missouri senate race between Jim Talent and Claire McCaskill. I don't live in either state but know more about these candidates than I do my own.

 

But like I said, if these things really did happen, is that negative or just being truthful and exposing some skeletons in the closet?

I disagree.

 

I think my generation is more willing to jump the fence than my father and his father's. My father went straight Democratic ticket this year on his absentee ballot. As a registered Democrat, I voted Republican for President, Independent for Representive while Democratic for local races.

 

Registering as a Dem in Kentucky means absolutely nothing. Many people register as Dems in this state just to have a chance to participate in the political process. Many of my Republican friends are registered Dems. Therefore, "jumping the fence" in Ky is the rule, not the exception.