Had dinner last night with a friend - who is going to vote for Joe Lieberman. I knew better than to open my mouth, so my husband asked him why.
We were given the usual talking points...his experience and presence on key committees (can't remember any other reason...the wine must have been blurring my hearing, thankfully!!)
Anyway, I regained my senses very quickly when he said, "And Lamont ran such a negative campaign during the primary, that really upset me".
I started to open my mouth, but my husband kicked me under the table. As we were doing dishes later, I asked my other half what our friend could possibly have meant, but he couldn't help me either.
So here's my question: what is negative advertising?
It seems to be a "framed" standard answer these days - usually the Repugs saying it about the Democrats.
I don't consider honestly bringing up an incumbent's past voting records or statements as negative. Hey, s/he did or said it, and if it's against the will of the people, it's actually honest advertising.
I do generally consider bringing personal issues into a campaign as negative, although there must be times when it's important for voters to know (crimes; pedophilia; lying).
I consider lying about an opponent's record negative. And I consider gross exaggerations negative, too. ("He voted to raise taxes 3,000 times"...when they're talking about one tax bill that actually included lots of good things, too).
So, help me, please, how do I counter a "negative campaign" allegation when all that's been done is accurately cite a person's voting record