Negative ads - your stance?

[Correll]

I just saw an ad. It was bunch of clips of Trump saying a bunch of really stupid things, and the announcer saying Trump wasn't the best choice. i guess you could call that a negative ad, but I call it information that everyone should have.

If it showed small kids between those clips then it is the same ad I saw. Which begs the question which is worse, saying those things once in an adult forum or playing it time-and-time again? I saw it around 4:30 in the afternoon when children are most likely watching. Which I'm sure is why it caused me to view it so critically.

Not as bad as constant discussion of blowjobs every day on the evening news back when Bill was in office. Somehow right wingers thought it was proper to discuss oral sex every chance possible.

Somehow the previous years of " sexual harassment is really serious" pounded into their heads, by the feminists, led the republicans to foolish believe that sexual harassment was really serious.

 

[Care4all]

i can tolerate the neg ads, but the in person, negative comments in every rally and event, by both hillary and donald, is getting old...

 

[Correll]

Negative ads can be good if they give real actual information about the candidate.

If they are just full of lies, then not so much.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Heard it where? I'm willing to learn something. Can you provide the link?

Look what you just did. You just tried to claim that Trumps negatives are related to his inexperience as a politician while Clinton's are related to her being "crooked". As if people are turned off by Trump because he's not a career politician. Funny.

Also...you habitually call one candidate by last name and the other by first name. Why do you do that?

Because if you just say Clinton, you could be referring to Bill or Hil-Liar.

Yes, not having a political background does scare a lot of people. The standard is to have professional politicians in the White House. This is an entirely new thing that we've never experienced before in America. It even scares me.

That is NOT the primary....nor even a substantial...reason for his high negatives. You are sugar coating. It's embarrassing.

 

[DGS49]

any truthful ad is fair game. It's the lies and distortions that drive me crazy.

For example, every democrat running for Congress has an ad where s/he says that the opponent (a Republican) "voted to end Social Security." And when you dig down through all the bullshit it was a vote in committee on a "omnibus" bill that included taking 5c out of every million dollars and letting the taxpayer invest it in the stock market.

Lies.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

any truthful ad is fair game. It's the lies and distortions that drive me crazy.

For example, every democrat running for Congress has an ad where s/he says that the opponent (a Republican) "voted to end Social Security." And when you dig down through all the bullshit it was a vote in committee on a "omnibus" bill that included taking 5c out of every million dollars and letting the taxpayer invest it in the stock market.

Lies.

Nah, they never lie:

 

[BULLDOG]

I just saw an ad. It was bunch of clips of Trump saying a bunch of really stupid things, and the announcer saying Trump wasn't the best choice. i guess you could call that a negative ad, but I call it information that everyone should have.

If it showed small kids between those clips then it is the same ad I saw. Which begs the question which is worse, saying those things once in an adult forum or playing it time-and-time again? I saw it around 4:30 in the afternoon when children are most likely watching. Which I'm sure is why it caused me to view it so critically.

Not as bad as constant discussion of blowjobs every day on the evening news back when Bill was in office. Somehow right wingers thought it was proper to discuss oral sex every chance possible.

Somehow the previous years of " sexual harassment is really serious" pounded into their heads, by the feminists, led the republicans to foolish believe that sexual harassment was really serious.

You know better than that.

 

[Slade3200]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

Orielly had a pollster on last night who compared negative ads. Trump had one that only showed Obama and Clinton talking about Benghazi and it envoked a positive reaction towards Clinton for undecided voters. I don't think the general public thinks the "lies" and "corruptions" are as intentional and serious and the wing nuts do

 

[BluesLegend]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

Orielly had a pollster on last night who compared negative ads. Trump had one that only showed Obama and Clinton talking about Benghazi and it envoked a positive reaction towards Clinton for undecided voters. I don't think the general public thinks the "lies" and "corruptions" are as intentional and serious and the wing nuts do

Americans died, that seems pretty serious to me.

 

[Correll]

I just saw an ad. It was bunch of clips of Trump saying a bunch of really stupid things, and the announcer saying Trump wasn't the best choice. i guess you could call that a negative ad, but I call it information that everyone should have.

If it showed small kids between those clips then it is the same ad I saw. Which begs the question which is worse, saying those things once in an adult forum or playing it time-and-time again? I saw it around 4:30 in the afternoon when children are most likely watching. Which I'm sure is why it caused me to view it so critically.

Not as bad as constant discussion of blowjobs every day on the evening news back when Bill was in office. Somehow right wingers thought it was proper to discuss oral sex every chance possible.

Somehow the previous years of " sexual harassment is really serious" pounded into their heads, by the feminists, led the republicans to foolish believe that sexual harassment was really serious.

You know better than that.

I know that you could say nothing to dispute what I said, but wanted to sound like you could.

 

[my2¢]

Bill Clinton is trying to make the case that "Make America Great Again" is racist and you claim Trump isn't running a clean campaign? What is hilarious about this is FoxNews is showing video tape of Bill Clinton saying "make America great again" in his campaign speeches and political Ads. LOL.

I don't think we'll hear the liberals make the case Trump's campaign slogan is racist again.

I expressed what I expected from Trump to earn my vote but I haven't seen a single Trump ad and so I didn't claim that he went negative. I was impressed with him the other day in the Commander-in-Chief interview when his criticisms were made within context of the questions, something in my opinion he was able to accomplish effectively.

 

[Slade3200]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

Orielly had a pollster on last night who compared negative ads. Trump had one that only showed Obama and Clinton talking about Benghazi and it envoked a positive reaction towards Clinton for undecided voters. I don't think the general public thinks the "lies" and "corruptions" are as intentional and serious and the wing nuts do

Americans died, that seems pretty serious to me.

Yes they did, a complete tragedy. Not everybody blames Hillary and Obama for that

 

[my2¢]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

I see the sentence you wrote to be a perfect example of going negative and serving no useful purpose to an impartial voter. It contains assumptions that are as plain as the nose on one's face, can't you see them?

Now if my mind is already made up, well then I can find negative ads downright entertaining.

 

[Correll]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

I see the sentence you wrote to be a perfect example of going negative and serving no useful purpose to an impartial voter. It contains an assumption that's as plain as the nose on one's face, can't you see it?

If the ad contains a reference to an ACTUAL lie, corrupt act or failure, what then?

 

[Tom Horn]

Abbie Hoffman used to say watching a liberal debate a conservative is what drove him to drop acid. In this race we have a stalinist criminal running against a billionaire developer who's bribed politicians his whole life and brags about it. What I want to see is Trump remind Hillary of what she and Willy promised him for his donations over the years....that should make for some good TV. I support Trump so we'll get a wall built and get out of our hideous trade deals. I was once a Rubio supporter but Trump took him apart in his own backyard so adios Marco. There isn't enough money in the world that would make me vote for the diaper-wearing shitstorm called Cankles.

 

[Rozman]

This election is analogous to a choice between having lung cancer or colon cancer.

Take your pick.

It's disgusting that our choice for President is between these two....
I wonder how many will stay home or pass on the vote for President
and vote the rest of the choices...the down ballot I guess it's called...

I'm leaning toward passing on the whole thing.

 

[g5000]

I saw a Hillary Clinton television ad last night. I didn't care for it and thought if she had anything good to say about her own stance on the issues she wouldn't be going negative on Trump.

The way I see it is the negatives for each of these candidates have pretty much reached rock bottom and the winner will be determined by which can get their "brand" to be viewed more favorably. I'd give Trump a big edge in this regard. I think most of us know Trump's campaign slogan of Make America Great Again. I wonder how many are with me in having no clue of Hillary's? (My choice would be, "Obama with balls" but please take that as a joke.)

Trump needs to convince me making America great again is more than nostalgic wishing for the good old days. Likewise Hillary needs to provide me some reason for optimism about her being elected. Going negative isn't going to cut it for either and I see it as a major turn off.

p.s. I also view negative campaigns as a way to make people sick-and-tired of the election and thus a means to suppress voting. I'd think that's a pretty dumb strategy for Hillary.

I've been saying for years that elections from now on are going to be determined by how many of your opponents supporters you can convince to stay home on election day. And the way to do that is through negative ads.

This is the natural outcome of the "lesser of two evils" bullshit. If you are a "lesser of two evils" rube and want to find the person to blame for negative ads, look in the mirror.

Negative ads aren't aimed at your candidate's supporters. They are aimed at the other guy's supporters and fence sitters.

Clinton and Trump have the highest unfavorable ratings in history. So they know it is an uphill climb to convince people to vote for them, but it is an easy downhill ride to attack their opponent's weaknesses.

It's All Mud From Here

 

[my2¢]

Its not a negative ad to point out Hillary's lies, corruption, and failures in government jobs.

I see the sentence you wrote to be a perfect example of going negative and serving no useful purpose to an impartial voter. It contains an assumption that's as plain as the nose on one's face, can't you see it?

If the ad contains a reference to an ACTUAL lie, corrupt act or failure, what then?

The accusations that Hillary lies, is corrupt and has had failures in government jobs are ones I do accept. If I had doubts they can be easily checked out. Why I see the sentence as negative is because it stops right there. It doesn't offer me any help in deciding who to vote for because I have not assumed that Trump has better character and haven't assumed he wouldn't have botched things even worse.

I'm not saying don't say anything bad about an opponent. But to do so without offering a positive comparison to oneself just isn't convincing to me.

 

[B. Kidd]

Ads have a much lesser impact in a 'not your usual campaign' year.

 

[blackhawk]

Let's face it it's far easier to tell people what's wrong with someone else than what's good about you. It seems to me all negative ads do is reinforce the perceptions that people who were never going to vote for someone in the first place already had a waste of time and money in my opinion.