If Any Politician Would Have Three Positive Ads...

[amelia]

i would vote for him/her.

i have not see ONE positive, "tell me about the candidate and what he/she stands for" ad this whole campaign.

(well..ok..i've seen one..but i've seen 1000 negative ones.)

what does it take to get your vote?

 

[Guest]

 

[cg_allstar]

i would vote for him/her.

i have not see ONE positive, "tell me about the candidate and what he/she stands for" ad this whole campaign.

(well..ok..i've seen one..but i've seen 1000 negative ones.)

what does it take to get your vote?

My vote can be bought for a really good blow job.

 

[Tap-Out]

i would vote for him/her.

i have not see ONE positive, "tell me about the candidate and what he/she stands for" ad this whole campaign.

(well..ok..i've seen one..but i've seen 1000 negative ones.)

what does it take to get your vote?

If they had your smile I'd vote for them

 

[Bogey77]

I would get a kick out of a candidate not trying to be funny/hip/cool when they clearly aren't.

My example: Al Gore.

When he did the Macarena, I wanted to vomit. When he kissed his wife, I did vomit.

<clears throat>

"YOU GUYS ARE OLD WHITE GUYS. DON'T TRY TO BE HIP. IT WON'T WORK."

 

[Minkey Boodle]

Marshmallow Peeps

 

[amelia]

Amelia, you're quite pretty....but you've got hamster cheeks...you storing some munchies for the winter bitch?

thanks for saying I'm pretty. yeah..i'm storing food for the winter. i'm a student. i'm poor.

 

[ma_guy]

I'd like to see a few candidates that actually step out and say that they are going to do things that they can actually do. Saying their going to push a tax cut or change school funding or some other crap means nothing. No one politician can do any of these themselves.

I'd love to see a politician stand up and say "Yeah, I screwed up the XYZ program. I learned my lesson and I won't do it again."

I'm soooooo tired of the false bravado, fake squeaky clean images and "let's make believe" outrage exhibited by these weenies.. When do we get to vote for some real people?

 

[Guest]

 

[amelia]

And I loathe students

yeah..learnin's for the weak

 

[Chuckus]

I'd love to see a Politician just come out and say "I smoked dope, did cocaine, lied on my tax returns and fuck my secretary".......he may be a shady character but he isn't hiding anything.

They are all puppets. Slave to the almighty dollar.

Bunch of lying fuckers, most of the time. They say they're gonna do this and that and in the end they do nada, zip, Zilch.

 

[Guest]

 

[amelia]

Oh looky, Amelia has a dig at Hanns

it's not a dig. i'm joking around with you. i'll stop.

 

[Guest]

 

[Zamdrist]

Are we playing nice in here?

 

[amelia]

OMG!! ZAM!! long time no see!

how's it goin?

 

[Zamdrist]

OMG!! ZAM!! long time no see!

how's it goin?

Going well....single still, and that's OK. All is cool. Quit smoking you know, been over three months now. Sorry, this is terribly off topic.

 

[modest mouse]

Politics has been annoying the shit out of me lately but let me say a few things.

The two-party political system encourages negative campaigning. In order to win primaries one must garner the votes of his/her party. This often means being as opposed to the other party as possible, to define yourself as a good party member. It is here that the shift away from ideas, policies, and actual ability to assist in governance begins.

The hostility between candidates from different parties is almost ludicrous. Its either a character assasination or jerimandered statements about the foolishness of of the opponenets policies/platform.

My problem with character assasination is that its often done with PAC money and from a secondary source. (The candidates rarely accuse each other directly, with a list of fuck-ups). Secondly; I do want to know if a candidate is a liar, thief, overall scumbag... but his/her private life is delved into only with great caution. I'm more interested in how he handled him'herslef in proffesional life.

About policy and platform attacks. It seems very few new ideas surface. Its the same diametrically opposed viewpoints. Rarely is the policies and voting histpory of any candidate represented. Its spun statements and flashy language.

In Vermont, the race to replace our GOvernor, who is not running for reelection, has brought up the idea of a Megan's Law for convicted drug dealers. Whether you are for or against the idea, its nice to have it floating around.

I don't blame the candidates because they use the tactics that win.

I tend to blame those who dont vote. Those who vote strongly along party lines.

Amelia, you're absolutely correct in that more ads for policy would be great. less ads of attacks or general bullshit. But time has shown that straightforward candidates cant win. That sucks.

 

[amelia]

That sucks.

well said. in my cultural geography class, we are learning about europe and some of their political systems. it's interesting to see that NO country is happy with their system.

I was very interested in france's system of percentage based representation. My teacher talked a lot about how that leads to center-fleeing parties. i wonder what that would be like.

 

[Weird Harold]

Amelia, you're absolutely correct in that more ads for policy would be great. less ads of attacks or general bullshit. But time has shown that straightforward candidates cant win. That sucks.

Policy ads can backfire on a candidate much easier than ads that attack an opponent.

As an example, a local candidate for congress had just about conviced me she was a better choice for the incumbent until she ran several ads saying she was a "strong supporter" of a State proposition that I find absolutely abhorant and a waste of tax dollars even putting it on the ballot.

Her ad on policy intead of attack lost her a vote with me -- the incumbent isn't great and I'd like to see her replaced, but NOT by someone bigoted and small-minded enough to support the proposition in question.

 

[modest mouse]

Policy ads can backfire on a candidate much easier than ads that attack an opponent.

While I think I understand your point; I would argue that your vote being swayed by an issue (in this case a proposition) is better than it being swayed by a series of attack ads(from both sides).

Policy ads are risky. It seems that people are often unwilling to vote for a candidate not entirely in line with themselves. If you look at polices, and the voting records of a candidate... not all will be inline with your own thoughts.

I feel, and I am rather jaded at this point in time, that people are too willing to vote the least-worst candidate (determined by attack ads) instead of the not-perfect-but pretty-damned-good candidate (as determined by policy).

 

[70/30]

Honestly, Ron Kirk has been putting some out recently. I listen to the local rap radio station and he had a positive one that pumped me up. Basically it was about how important this election cycle really is, especially for social security, education, finding ways to immediately create jobs, and working to help every Texan. Another one on TV he said that he did cut taxes 4 times as mayor of Dallas while working with business leaders to help create thousands of jobs and improve the community. The Sanchez, Perry, Dewhurst, Sharp, and Cornyn camps are politics as usual, I'm glad Kirk is encouraging people to get out and vote-in the midst of so much shit, that's the message we need.

 

[Weird Harold]

While I think I understand your point; I would argue that your vote being swayed by an issue (in this case a proposition) is better than it being swayed by a series of attack ads(from both sides).

I agree that it is much better for voters to be swayed by a policy statement from the candidate instead of alleged policy positions put forth by the opposition.

The problem from the candidate's perspective is that being definitive with policy statements has the potential to alienate more voters than oposition statements that say the same thing -- the opposition attack can be written off as rumor and inuendo even if it's correct.

Politicians hate being pinned down on any issue, so implying a policy position by attacking the opposition is just safer than saying anything that can be quoted back when you show your true colors.

I think that's what is really behind the profusion of attack ads in modern politics.

 

[amelia]

wow..i kinda started a serious thread!

 

[ma_guy]

wow..i kinda started a serious thread!

And all this time you thought your were just fluff! lol