If you are like me, you are fed up with negative slandering in the political candidates. For once in my lifetime, I would like to see a political campaign run by the candidates based on their own perceptions of what they would like to get done, like to change and how they will listen to the very people who put them in office, instead of always slandering their opponents. This kind of behavior is so demeaning and it defeats the entire purpose of politics. I would like to hear and understand the issues they stand for and their perceptions of how to implement, correct or finish the mistakes made by previous emcumbents, without the slander. Should we as the American voters put together a referendum to the legislature to get a bill passed to make it against the law for politicians running for office to slander, deface or dehumanize their opponents. It should not always be about who has the biggest budget either. In this day and age of the most valuable sources in the world, the Internet, it seems to me there are lots of ways to get the messages to the voting public without having to always beg us for their campaign funds. I look forward to this heated conversation with the members of this community and please do not disrespect me for my personal opinions.
Depends on what you consider negative campaigning. I don't consider this negative campaigning: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKTOCP45zY"]Newt Gingrich: Serial Hypocrisy - YouTube[/ame] I consider things like calling Ron Paul a racist for newsletters that aren't racist, were written twenty years ago, and weren't written by Ron Paul, to be negative campaigning. It's all but impossible to regulate.
Well Yes and No; sometimes the truth hurts and questions need to be asked. But after that, itÂ’s time to move on.
Agreed. Ron Paul posted that vid which exposes how Gingrich's career has gone all flippity, floppity.
I agree..but with some caveats. If we let Newt Gingrich campaign on flowers and sunny pastures...what would we learn about his stance on lobbyist? If My guy Romney can campaign on his record as Governor of Mass. He should be able to answer critics of his policies. If we let Perry just speak in a controlled environment with feel good questions how would we vet his ability when faced with hard questions and tactics? Nobody ever questioned Santorum why he lost his senate seat by the largest margin of any sitting senator ? in History ? How could he claim he would carry Pennsylvania when he lost his senate seat there by the largest margin ? MB claims that being a mother of 26 and a tax lawyer that she is qualified to be president..except her and her husbands stance on anybody different isn't totally examined? None of this stuff would ever be heard. It would be like every man out there asking the hottest babe out there to marry him based upon a single date..maybe 2 ? Did you ever tell her you were divorced twice with 2 dui s and cant pay child support because you cant keep a job ? Maybe they might like to hear that before the 3rd date ? Heck Ron Paul is a nut...but they still love him...so those lousy candidates and men still have a chance..as long as People dont recognize a better alternative. People are desperate and when desperate will date and vote for someone they know better yet they do. The difference is when dating you can always stop and run away..when you elect Paul ..good luck with that.
OK..2 things again. 1. You mention 20 years ago as if there is some magical timeline when views on bigotry and racism expire.People do change and modify but it is an important question like Romney's religion that needs a full response..not a shoulder shrug. 2. They weren't written by Paul yet Paul made Money off of them..lots If it were nothing Paul should be able to answer and deflect easily. Unlike Cain. But he better not go after Romney's layoffs because he was CEO of a giant business...apparently some CEOs are not involved in day to day activities..Get my point ?
I guess I'm of two minds on the subject. On the one hand, I kind like seeing politicians getting the stuffing knocked out of them, so we can see what they're made of, before we buy ...but Americans don't seem to have the time to investigate the legitimacy of these negative ads and parsing out hyperbole and untruths, and that creates some really misinformed voters pulling the levers.
welcome aboard.great points.The sad truth is that unless we get Ron Paul in office in the next election,none of that will ever transpire.He is the ONLY candidate that is for the people and who wants to serve them instead of the corporations and the banks. More importantly,he is the only candidate that believes in the constitution and free speech and our liberites as well.That is not mere opinion that is fact.Thats why there is a thing called THE RON PAUL REVOLUTION taking place.Even the people in chicago have woke up and realise they screwed up voting for Obozo because he has not only continued Bushwackers policys,he has expanded them as well. This is a great video you need to watch and everybody should watch.Takes about two hours but you take time to watch movies right? well them,I know you have time for this then.Here it is,enjoy.
Thanks everyone for the feedback, however, negative campaigning is the worst. Most of us already know most of the negatives that are being thrown around. We are adults and will be able to make up our own minds if we wish to let by-gones be by-gones or continue to hold grudges. Yes the media plays a huge role in these things, which again, they should NOT be allowed to do. Sorry if I am stepping on toes here, but things have to change if we are going to have actual elections, with actual issues, not slander issues or slander elections. Yes people do change and we cannot change the events of the past, but we can sure look forward to making a difference in our present and future. The actual candidates should start out letting people know they have not been perfect in their thinking, but that they have indeed learned from them. I know of not one person in the world who is or has ever been perfect. This is how we all learn to be the person we are, by making and taking responsibility for our mistakes and stupidity. Like someone said, say their peace and move onward, to the issues at hand without digressing and continually harping on their opponents mistakes. It is such a shame that they feel that by saying negative things and re-iterating past acts of their opponent is going to make them a better candidate. I would just like to see campaign speeches and debates based on the individual issues, not "Look how so and so handled this or that". Be firm on the issues and where they stand, what they feel they can and will attempt to do on their own merits.
You can thank Citizens United and The Supreme Court for this marinating bowl of crap. Sometimes you get exactly what you ask for.
WE HAD that for a moment yet the Hit Squads sent after Herman Cain made sure the same fluffy meringue political blather would return once a guy who spoke in hard specific points was removed. Cain made the entire beauty contest look bad and HAD to be removed by the $$$$$ who make sure the Dumbass American voter chooses candidates with the alacrity pimply high schoolers choose a prom king. The Rich perpetrated the biggest ponzy scheme in world history as banks and Wall street got away with their crime scott free. they make sure who we get to choose from the totally inept morally compromised Hopey Changey or the equally compromised republican schill. I would never believe i would say this but I am voting Ron Paul because Both democrats and republicans have proven they are so craven they are not worthy of my vote now and maybe never ever again.
