October 28, 2006
-
Negative Campaigning
We are at the time of the year where we get to see political commercials. We get to hear about how the other candidate has no vision for the future. We get to hear about how the other candidate didn’t vote in favor of the latest tax cut. We get to hear about something they did 25 years ago.
It is the time of the year where millions are spent by politicians to speak negative about their competition. Everyone will say they hate it. But that doesn’t stop them from doing it.
Does negative campaigning work?
Comments (102)
i dont really think so because you get so far away from the actual issues the voters don’t know who to vote for.
I think that it can, yes.
and I think that just kind of immature to, well so and so is bad so don’t vote for her, vote for me!yaya…I mean, sure you wanna put yourself on the pedestal but its just like…unneccessary. If you cant persuade the voters with what you support then you shouldn’t be running.
yep
Top ten!
Top five!
I guess I just live in an area where everyone likes to do that i guess..
i think it can. unfortunately, i think it also works to completely disgust people with the political system and create a sense of apathy.
Yes it does to the people who do not pay attention to politics.
I hate negative campaigning. It makes me not want to vote for either of them. Makes both candidates look like lying sacks of crap!!
I love it! The commercials that I am seeing are all critisizing republican Senator candidates and they bring Bush into them, too. Theres one that I really love….anti kean/Bush (its a New jersey commercial). I have a link to watch the commercial because I posted it the other day….hold on; I’ll be right back with it!
Do I think negative campaigning works? Not really. I think that most people are pretty much set in their ways and will stick with their original poilitical party!
yes
My favorite negative campaigning commercial—-> Kean/Bush
It shouldn’t, at least not as well as positive campaigning, but it does.
It’s as if we enjoy seeing someone put down and their flaws brought out rather than to actually pick the candidate with the better plan. (Not that many of them have planes mind you.)
I hate negative campaigning. it looks trashy.
All political ads are the same:
“My opponent sucks, so do I. This is why I point out to you how my opponent sucks. Vote for me. I approve this message”
Negative campaigning SUCKS!!!! I have kids I try to teach to talk nice to each other and then these campaign adds flood the TV. Mud slinging = infantile name calling. This is why I refuse to vote until we return to the true form of republic that we founded this country upon. What we have now is a joke of a system where politicians buy their votes and establish policies from the pressure of these contributors when they get into office. Corruption!
To answer you question. NO!
Yes you stupid prick, This Message Was Bought and Paid for By the I’m A Big Fat Liar Campaign and I approve this message!
If it didn’t they would have stoped doing it years ago
almost
Damned if I know.
it’s just REALLY annoying
Unfortunately. And people get duped. It’s one thing if a candidate got off a murder charge because of a technicality because an investigator compromised evidence, but we don’t need to hear that a candidate recieved an MIP for drinking at a party when he was a senior in high school, and has been an exemplary citizen for 20 years after.
It biases people, even if they don’t really realize it. Some people in my state can’t stand one of the candidates running for governor simply because they don’t like the president and some of the incumbant governor’s commercials equate the two, but the physical similarities are all people remember, because they merge one picture with another. I guess that it’s quite creepy, but no one can recall what it said, just that the two pictures were so similar.
Depends on who’s listening and what they want to hear.
Usually it does.
i dunna no
No
A little, yes. And it SUCKS!
it seems too. But it should be held to higher standards…
Negative campaigning works at making people become disgusted with the whole electoral process.
I’ve been complaining about this for months. It really depends on the audience they are speaking to.
I just wanted to say that I love the mix of serious questions (sometimes tackling controversial topics such as abortion) and the, well, less serious ones (ie: fajitas). It’s nice to know that everyone takes life less seriously than we tend to think. And oh yeah, steak for sure.
With everything going on, I’d just vote for the candidate with the coolest name
Yep.
Definitely.
Yes. Just like all other forms of advertising, if it was ineffective then they would stop doing it. Besides, these ads are typically not trying to sway the hard-core voters who always go one directions. That only works if the opposing candidate has done a really bad job or has a really bad secret scandal. These ads are primarily for the indecisive voters. They are also very effective among the uneducated voters (not the uneducated PEOPLE, the uneducated VOTERS – there is a difference) who don’t usually realize that not all campaign ads are 100% true (or even 50% true).
Yes and no. It works. . .enough that your competitor then has to negative campaign against you.
Cancelling each other’s efforts out. A waste of time. But more then possible to do I imagine, if you have people campaigning for you with money to spend on political commericals “not endorsed” by you because of the donation cap on how much an individual can give per party or what-not.
Some people have nothing better to do then commercials, and part of the reason the like their person is because THEY HATE their opponent.
So we’ll always have yucky campaigning.
It does work in circumstances where you want low voter turnout.
Of course it works. Every time a person hears a piece of gossip, no matter who you are, you always stop and think about it. That is exactly what the politicians are trying to do, make us stop and think about who we believe is the best candidate.
heck yes
yes
negative campaignig does work. If you watch the news, you know that the Missouri Senatorial race is a bloody one, but I live in Missouri and so I see the adds all the time Claire McKaskel has brought in Michael J. Fox and Talent has brought in Jim Cavezel and Jeff Suppan to support them on the stem cell ammendment. It is probrably one of the bloodiest races I have ever seen.
too much. because it slowly turn voters away from both side. because polititians are scum and when they reveal it about each other it makes you want to vote even less.
Unfortunately, there are weak minds who fall into that trap.
[ariana]
Absolutely. Unfortunately, then people vote not for who they want in office, but not for who they don’t want in office.
Somewhat yes. But negetive things about both are being said, so it kinda cancels each other out.
No…it just makes things confusing…
Yes. Works for me.
Repeating the same thing, even if it’s false, over and over again is effective.
It depends on the subject. If it really happened and was a big event, that’ll give us a jolt to not vote for the competition. But if it just sounds petty and we never even heard of it, chances are we won’t believe it.
i saw a report that said that they do work – which is why they are used.
Depends on who’s listening and what they want to hear.
Posted 10/28/2006 at 9:41 AM by Breath_Of_Dawn
Ding! Ding! Ding! Correct answer.
it seems to, yes…personally it just makes me loathe politicians
quite probably
Not always.
It’s worked wonders for the Republicans for at least 10 years.
I don’t think it really makes a difference either way b/c most people already know for whom they will vote, so negative commercials just accentuate the stupidity of the other candidate. I think you just ignore negative commercials that your candidate made.
then, of course, there are the negative commercials made by people who support the candidate and not the candidate himself.
No, it doesn’t. I listen to what little they say about the campaign issues and turn the negative off. In fact, if they get too negative, I refuse to vote for them–regardless of party affiliation.
It might. There was this guy running for governer that came to my College a few weeks ago and a couple of days later they showed him on television saying “Look at this guy, he’s filming his video’s in a church, but he used to go to strip clubs” or something along those lines. It must work because my grandpa says he isn’t going to vote for him after seeing that commercial.
It might. There was this guy running for governer that came to my College a few weeks ago and a couple of days later they showed him on television saying “Look at this guy, he’s filming his video’s in a church, but he used to go to strip clubs” or something along those lines. It must work because my grandpa says he isn’t going to vote for him after seeing that commercial.
They try, but they get so far away from the issues at hand, which is the most important. A lot of campaigning is being the most successful liar.
I dunno but I think it’s hilarious.
ridiculous politics
I’m not sure of it works, since I can’t vote anyway since I am Dutch, [I am a Legal Alien, though!] but it is hella-entertaining to watch…
I’ve heard that it does. And then everybody votes for someone, only knowing what they don’t do, thanks to the negative ads of the other guy. It’s as if people don’t care what the candidate stands for, as long as it’s not the bad stuff that was in the ads.
Turns me off, but it does make me start looking closer at the candidate’s stand on the issues.
If it didn’t, they probably wouldn’t do it, so I suppose. But I respect a politician who doesn’t sink to that level.
Sometimes.
Ir works in the sense that, if you don’t engage in it, you’ll be toast.
Unfortunately, yes. On some people.
unfortunately, people are to stupid and not politicallt savvy… it works, becuase not enough people care to notice that theyre being decieved…
Yes – It makes me NOT vote for the person doing it
Yes. Just like all other forms of advertising, if it was ineffective then they would stop doing it. Besides, these ads are typically not trying to sway the hard-core voters who always go one directions. That only works if the opposing candidate has done a really bad job or has a really bad secret scandal. These ads are primarily for the indecisive voters. They are also very effective among the uneducated voters (not the uneducated PEOPLE, the uneducated VOTERS – there is a difference) who don’t usually realize that not all campaign ads are 100% true (or even 50% true).
Posted 10/28/2006 at 10:20 AM by casvelyn
I completely agree.
You bet it does.
I can’t believe no one is crying ”freedom of speech”.
Yes, unfortunately.
-KrIsTiN-
No, but it sure is fun watching what the other digs up. I would be shocked if I ever saw an honest politician. I don’t thing I will ever have to worry about that.
We all hate it. We hate it because it isn’t informative at all, and it is the worst way to go about the political system because we’ll probably end up hating the person who gets elected.
But the sad part is that it is effective.
No, not for me at least. I can see through it, and I know WHY they vote for the bad stuff that they do. They clump a lot of different law ideas together at once and then the politicians basically have to decide which is the more important issue. For example, they put together legalizing marijana and making abortions illegal, so they have to choose which is the greater issue. Anyways, I saw a HUGE billboard earlier today that said, “BARON HILL SUPPORTS ABORTION” I was like, wow, tattle-tale much?
it can, depending on how it’s done. but i saw one of those negative campaign ads that actually made me want to vote for the guy it was against…so i suppose it doesn’t work so well with me.
It can and it can’t
Depends on how the listener takes it,
because we all choose our own individual ways to interput what we hear
Hey there, Free Music Codes For Your Xanga!
Hip-Hop, Rnb, Slow Jamz & Pop Music codes
Just go to
http://www.crazybeatz.com
Enjoy!
they just make it sound good. i hate that.
It seems to work. But it makes me lose respect for the canidate that is bashing the other canidate
Yes, I think it does.
Not really, I tried it with aneorixic people, go see my xanga. It doesn’t work.
Maybe it works since it continues to be used. It certainly doesn’t work on me. I received numerous phone messages telling me how one of the candidates was corrupt. This infuriated me, because I don’t want telemarketers of any kind calling me. I had never voted for the target of the calls, but thought I would this time because of the phone calls. Then I saw him on TV and was reminded what a total creep he is. No way could I vote for him. But I didn’t vote for his main competition either, in case that guy was behind the phone calls. In short, I don’t want to be marketed, told how to vote or manipulated in any way, and invading my privacy by calling the phone number I pay for for my purposes is not the way to make me a friend.
IN A WORLD OF PEOPLE WHO SEEK NEGATIVE ATTENTION…YEP!
I usually vote for who I see the most negative campaigning against. Being in the South, most “negative” campaigning is: “he a liberal,” “he gave money to John Kerry!”
Well that’s just the person I’m looking for!
I have no idea if it works or not. But I don’t think it’s necessary. Why don’t they just stick to promoting their OWN accomplishments or future plans instead of trashing their opponent. It gets old, really old.
i agree with breath of dawn. it really does depend on who’s listening because some people will see that and identify it simple as negative campaigning that doesn’t really deal with the current issues and write it off as bullshit. but someone else may see it as an effort to point out the reason’s why you shouldn’t vote for the other candidate and take it as something credible.
it can, but I just kind of think it’s low. You shouldn’t have to focus on the negative aspects of your opponent in order to win a campaign.
to a point. mildly talking about some undesirable decisions the opponent has made can be telling, BUT resorting to slam tactics alone will hurt the candidate. in my district, we had 2 republicans competing for our state House seat. They had somewhat different views in a few areas, but the challenger’s strategy was to bash the incumbent for not being effective or getting anything done (using some mega-funding from james leininger). well, guess what – the incumbent won!
Yes, it makes me want to stick up for the underdog and vote for the person who’s being portrayed negatively.
Yes it does unfortunately. People are gullible.
Unfortunately, yes.
Negative campaining is a waste of time! In Ohio, we are having the Senate Race and you will not believe the amount of mudslining that these candidates do! It’s very annoying.
You raise a very good point. For years I’ve been rolling my eyes at commercials that campaign by naming the weaknesses of their opponents. Currently, there is a thirty second commercial on television that starts as a list of flaws of the opposing candidate and their past legal situations and such… And the commercial ends the same way. No where throughout the entire commercial is the candidate you SHOULD vote for mentioned. This campaigning sickens me. It’s been a while since anyone has run a fair campaign. Even the presedential elections are this way. I believe, on a small scale, this type of campaigning is very ineffective. Great. I know who NOT to vote for. But… wait.. Who DO I vote for? On the contrary, when it comes to elections such as the presedential ones, it’s different. We’re only exposed to a few candidates and these candidates effect us and our county on such a large scale… But, at least our presedential candidate’s strengths are shown (much more than that of candidates for local offices).
i dont think so
i dont think so!!!
It has the adverse effect on me. For example…If I can’t find some other candidate for the office being run for by Ford and Corker, then I am not going to vote for that particular office. I would rather support someone I know is going to loose than support either of those mud throwing men. If a politician can’t stick to how he stands on certian issues and leave his opponent out of it (except in formal debates), then he is not fit for office.
I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPPONENT!!! WHERE DO YOU STAND???
Cowboy
Not with informed voters who will go check all of the facts
It does not work on me. I have zero respect for those who resort to slamming their opponent. I want to hear why I SHOULD vote for a candidate, not why I SHOULD NOT vote for the other.
“Claire McCaskill is a dangerous liberal!” makes me giggle, because hey, Claire McCaskill hasn’t blown up anyone, has she?