Last week, I received my first fundraising phone call from a popular Democratic presidential candidate's campaign. Let's call this candidate X.
The gentleman was polite, just a bit pushy. I indicated I was undecided, and until I had made a decision about which candidate I wanted to support, I did not wish to make a contribution. At this point, the caller brought up candidate Y, another popular presidential candidate. The caller seemed to want to scare me into contributing to X by mentioning Y's fundraising success. I interrupted and informed him that Y was my last choice of anyone running. Interpreting that as support for X, the caller then tried his final push for my pledge. At this point I was very put off by the whole idea, and said my kids were ready to go swimming and I needed to go now (in truth, I probably had at least a few minutes before my kids burned the house down) and said goodbye and good luck.
I thought about what caused me to be especially irritated by the fundraiser's mention of Y and his apparent belief that by rejecting Y I was embracing X. I realized that (1) invoking candidate Y was, in fact, an attempt at fear-mongering , a Republican tactic, (2) there was no attempt to differentiate X & Y in a substantive way and (3) the caller seemed to dismiss the other candidates running.
When candidates want my support, I would rather there be comparisons and contrasts between their ideas and plans, so I can make an informed decision. Leave the fear-mongering and hate to the Republicans. Maybe I'm being cynical, but whoever the eventual candidate is will likely be supported by the Dems who didn't win the primary and all that "kissy face" stuff afterward makes me ill especially if there has been any vitriol during the contest. Campaigns should also remember that right now the primary is between more than just 2 candidates, and I am undecided between candidate X and candidate Z (and Al Gore, should he decide to run).