Holy crap, campaign attack ads

I was just watching a round up of political attack ads in the current elections going on in America. How can people stand it? It's like a kindergarten playground out there, but far nastier. The smallest incidents are blown up out of all proportion, a Hollywood script writer couldn't have made more of them.

The ads I saw were wildly negative and outrageously inaccurate. And what's more the candidates themselves seem to be distancing themselves from the ads, even though they were paid for and 'approved' by their own parties, calling them "tacky", "despicable" or "over the line."

I guess the worst aspect of all this is that the ads work.

Yeah, that's a big point that keeps getting brought up here. These candidates seem more interested in making their opponent look bad than they are in actually focusing on "the issues."

This one guy I saw has someone follow his competition around and record them. Then he posts his blunders on the internet for all to see.

I know people want to see a good race, but when the whole thing's just a giant smear campaign, then it's no fun.

Thank God for the web.

Everything is archived. All the lies and truths are out there somewhere.

.

factcheck.org is on it already, but I doubt many people who vote will bother to get the facts.

Study after study shows that no matter how much people say they dislike negative campaigning it works.

i find factcheck.org to use some strange logic at times. for instance, how is a deduction in college tuition a tax break? asking for special treatment on a ticket is not false because the ticket was paid.

not raising the age limit for taser use is not discounted (or misleading to point out) because there was some reason (faulty, imo) behind it. seems like a valid observation of a poor decision being pointed out.

well it's certainly nothing new, these types of ads surface every 2 years around election time and I agree they are annoying, however, psychologically they may actually have a greater impact on people's opinions than positive ads. If Joe Schmo runs an ad about how he promises to do all these positive things, it won't have as great an impact on voter impression than if he runs an ad about how his opponent is a racist nazi, regardless of whether or not it is true. Candidates who play nice usually lose. Media works the same way, negative news gets more attention than positive.

I'm also not certain that theres concrete evidence that smear campaigns "work" either. Does anyone have that data? How would you measure that?

I think that what happens is that whoever loses a campaign points to the unholy dirty tactics the other side used to win unfairly. In reality, the people probably had reasons that had nothing to do with the ads for voting the way they did.

Usually the intention of negative ads in particular from Republicans is to discourage the voters from voting. That increases normally Republican votes and unfortunately it seems to work.

wasn't Fret's running? We need an attack ad against him to make his campaign complete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cancerinform

Usually the intention of negative ads in particular from Republicans is to discourage the voters from voting. That increases normally Republican votes and unfortunately it seems to work.

---

do you have any examples of Republican ads discouraging voting?

It is written in a nuymber of articles. i first read in a German Journal, heard it in TV and you can read it everywhere like here:

http://progressivedailybeacon.com/mo...pinion&id=1313

These ads are intended at just upsetting undecided voters not to go to the election.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=6386604

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yasunobu13

wasn't Fret's running? We need an attack ad against him to make his campaign complete.

---

Before you saivor the moment for too long.

Remember advertising in the forum is not allowed as it's considered spam.
That which is not an ad and defames a member can be considered abuse.
Especially if the infromation provided is falsified or breaches personal privacy.

Frets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frets

Before you saivor the moment for too long.

Remember advertising in the forum is not allowed as it's considered spam.
That which is not an ad and defames a member can be considered abuse.
Especially if the infromation provided is falsified or breaches personal privacy.

Frets

---

There are ways my friend, there are ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cancerinform

It is written in a nuymber of articles. i first read in a German Journal, heard it in TV and you can read it everywhere like here:

http://progressivedailybeacon.com/mo...pinion&id=1313

These ads are intended at just upsetting undecided voters not to go to the election.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=6386604

---

lmao, the Progressive Daily Beacon, well surely that isn't 100% biased. As for the second article, it proves nothing of which you say.

NRP....gezzz....that's not left wing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cancerinform

It is written in a nuymber of articles. i first read in a German Journal, heard it in TV and you can read it everywhere like here:

http://progressivedailybeacon.com/mo...pinion&id=1313

These ads are intended at just upsetting undecided voters not to go to the election.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=6386604

---

I can see now where you borrowed the opinion. But, I would ask the same question to the author's of those articles. Both parties run ads that are critical of their opponents. None of them, to my knowledge, suggest that anyone should not vote.

Unless there is evidence that critical ads cause less voting, you could say, with as much validity, that the negative campaigns are designed to improve sales of steering wheel covers. According to news that I've heard, voter turn-out has been above average and is expected to be at record levels this election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

I can see now where you borrowed the opinion. But, I would ask the same question to the author's of those articles. Both parties run ads that are critical of their opponents. None of them, to my knowledge, suggest that anyone should not vote.

Unless there is evidence that critical ads cause less voting, you could say, with as much validity, that the negative campaigns are designed to improve sales of steering wheel covers. According to news that I've heard, voter turn-out has been above average and is expected to be at record levels this election.

---

Ok, here is a study

http://www.virginia.edu/topnews/rele...ly-6-1999.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cancerinform

Ok, here is a study

http://www.virginia.edu/topnews/rele...ly-6-1999.html

---

the study demonstrates that people dont like negative ads and will punish those responsible for them! this suggests that, if you dont like Republicans, they're doing exactly what you want them to (assuming you also believe they are raking more mud than anyone else).

it does say that negative ads may affect turnout. but, it doesnt substantiate the notion either. lower turnout could just as easily be due to people caring less. even if they were to say it was due to negative ads, it might just be an easy excuse for them not voting due to election night falling on Monday Night Football.

honestly, the ads, for and against, generally make me want to vote more.

The ads make me write to the people involved in those tactics and let them know that I'm amazed they can actually reach into a person's past as such and yet enforce laws that allow that behavior to continue after one or the other has won.

Either way, the ads don't really affect my decision. Nor aggravate me. They're commercials and thusly... ignorable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlashLackey

honestly, the ads, for and against, generally make me want to vote more.

---

The ads are not targeted at the typical Democrat, who no matter what will vote Democrat and will go to the election, same with typical Republican voters. The ads are targeted at the large portion of swing voters who voted for Bush or a Republican candidate and who is not even really convinced to vote for Democrats but wants to teach Republicans a lecture. These voters now become insecure and end up saying "O well, politics is a dirty business. I better keep my hands clean. No matter what I vote for they are all the same. I don't go voting. May be it even rains or is cold."
When people are apolitical Republicans win. That is why they are interested in keeping the large population stupid.