TIME is running an online poll right now, asking a simple question: Who is running a more negative campaign.
http://time-blog.com/...
OK -- it's not surprising that McCain is winning nationally (84% to 16% over Obama). But when you look at state by state results, it is clear that EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE sees right through the McSame BS.
McCain leads on the MOST NEGATIVE factor in states including:
- Arkansas (86%)
- Alaska (67%)
- Arizone (74%)
- Montana (92%)
- Kansas (74%)
Oh, I could go on and on. Sure, it's just an online poll. And sure negative advertising works. But perhaps... just perhaps... there's a limit to how far McSame can go over the next few weeks. While Team Obama still has a lot of ammunition left to fire... (Go vote!)
Some updates...
Experts from wikipedia (if such a thing exists) note that there are times when negative advertising is APPROPRIATE in a campaign.
N
egative campaigning might be the 'proper course' during political contests in the following situations:
- when taking on an incumbent
- when being significantly outspent
- when there is irrefutable information that the opponent has done something wrong
- when the candidate has little name recognition
Of course, NONE of these conditions apply to McSame and his negativity. It gives me hope -- that this year, maybe this year -- the American public will say ENOUGH.