I don’t know whether others are noticing this. But in every election there’s one big disconnect between the ‘issues’ that are getting the big play in tv shows and pundit commentary and the ones getting hammered on in flyers, tv ads and radio spots. And there’s no question that this year, for the GOP, that ‘issue’ is race tinged ads about Democrats wanting to give free dollars to hordes of Mexican illegals. Scratch the surface of any competitive race out there. You’ll find it.
TPM Reader KS writes in in distress from Count Chocola country …
The comments on TPM today about Social Security bamboolzement reminded me of a flyer I received in the
mail from Chris Chocola’s campaign last week. I am paraphrasing somewhat, but this is very close. It
said, “Who Should Receive Social Security Benefits?
A. American Citizens.
B. Illegal Immigrants.
C. Both.Joe Donnelly says ‘C’, which will cost Americans millions of dollars. Chris Chocola says ‘A’! ”
Of course we all know the real answer for Chocola is secret answer “D”, none of the above. I am frustrated
that both the local media and Donnelly’s campaign have seen silent on this. If Donnelly used Chocola’s
phase-out words against him, I am sure it would have an impact on voters in my district.
As far as I can see, most every Dem campaign is missing the boat on this.
And of course the boat is sailing.
New “stay the course” ad — special Joe Lieberman addition. It’s a good one.
TPM Reader DR from Duckworthland …
I live in the Chicagoland Area. Last week, I saw two ads that for some reason a station played back to back. First was a Tammy Duckworth ad that was all about Tammy Duckworth. Then came a Peter Roskam ad that was all about Tammy Duckworth.
Positive ads come off as fluff. Negative ads give people a reason to vote a certain way. In the ad I saw, the reason was that Tammy Duckworth is going to give social security money to illegal aliens.
Are Democrats afraid to go negative? Do the people making the ads realize how unpopular the Republican Party is right now? Here in Illinois, we are about to reelect a corrupt Governor. The only thing he has going for him is that he is not a Republican. In this environment, negative ads against Republicans will work. What are we waiting for?
People are already voting. The last-second blitzes should be going on now.
Roskam is really the worst of the worst this year. Do they let him squeak through?
What lengths have those connected to Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-NV) gone to cover up his cocktail waitress incident?
Justin Rood gives a rundown here.
White House: Cheney didn’t endorse water-boarding when he endorsed water-boarding.
Here’s the best line though. Tony Snow: “You know as a matter of common sense that the vice president of the United States is not going to be talking about water boarding. Never would, never does, never will. You think Dick Cheney’s going to slip up on something like this? No, come on.”
You mean, Dick Cheney totally muff something out of mix of arrogance and incompetence?
Who could ever imagine that?
Late Update: Here are the exact words Cheney said. You decide whether to believe Tony Snow or your own lying eyes.
Even Later Update from TPM Reader EL: “In regards to Cheney slipping up, lets not forget we’re talking about the guy who shot his friend in the face and was caught calling a reporter a “major league a$$hole” on tape and that’s just what comes to mind, I’m sure there are a couple dozen other Cheney slip up’s out there.” I was thinking of some of the weightier screw-ups like, say, Iraq or some of these examples. (Do we forget that Cheney’s the bumbler who headed up the pre-9/11 terrorism task force that forgot to meet until something like a week before 9/11? Doh!) But, hey, more bonehead screw-ups the merrier.
TPM reader TCB responds to TPM Reader DR.
The DCCC has 2 negative ads up in this market, one hitting Roskam for being in favor of banning books by Laura Ingalls Wilder and Martin Luther King and one for voting with the NRA in favor of guns in schools.
Theyâre both quite negative.
Why positive? Well, there are 8 candidates who are up in this market trashing each other. The positive stuff breaks through.
Here’s the thing on negative ads. It’s time for the closer to come in on this campaign. There’s no question this campaign has been effectively nationalized. Both sides are playing on that terrain. But it’s time for the closer to come in. And from the numbers I’ve seen from various states and districts, this is all about President Bush and Iraq — with the awfulness of the Republican Congress, its irrelevance and corruption sort of second-tier, atmospheric issue. If I’m programming the negative ads, I front the disaster of Iraq and that voting for Republican X is another rubber stamp for President Bush. Another free pass to let the disasters keep coming. That’s the deal closer.
Is book-banning like on anyone’s radar? Maybe we get some ads about evolution too. A few good ad runs about driving the speed limit could put this one away.
Says another TPM Reader: “I have been watching the RNCC ads for Peter Roskam. They are, to say the least, distorted and blatant lies. What I can’t figure out is why the DNCC isn’t countering with ads as to how the RNCC treats our veterans. Ms. Duckworth lost both legs in Iraq and these ads are the thanks she gets from the Republicans. Democrats need to drill home the point ‘Why does Peter Roskam and the RNCC chose to smear one of our decorated Iraq veterans?'”
This really is pretty unbelievable: NBC won’t run ads for the Dixie Chicks documentary because, in the words of the NBC’s commercial clearance department, “they are disparaging to President Bush.”
Networks usually at least go to the length of coming up with a phony ‘we don’t run ads with a political message’ excuse. But I’m not sure I’ve ever seen one say something like this. I would have thought that with the president’s popularity so low some of the network’s usual supineness and cowardice would be a little less evident. Would they not run political ads either?