Also in the email, Obama states that "Senator Clinton continues to run an expensive, negative campaign against us. Each day her campaign launches a new set of desperate attacks. They're not just attacking me; they're attacking you." As noble and proud that sounds, it sounds familiarly like negative campaigning. Reporting all the negative aspects of your opponents campaign back to your supporters can come off as negative campaigning, but if you're that supportive of your favorite to win, than by all means, accept it as is. Your point of view?
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Obama sends me a semi-personal email
Today I received an email from Barack Obama, an email which I get weekly from being on his campaign website's emailing list. The email subject was titled "Victories and Attacks" and it included gloats about winning Mississippi by a "wide margin" and Wyoming this past Saturday. Obama includes the fact that the two states are largely different, and that he is now taken back his strong lead, which is what he states he had before the prior Clinton winning primaries. I'll give everyone a chance to brag, though.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with you in that Obama's statement is more or less generating dislike towards the Clinton campaign by pointing out her negativity. However, I wouldn't go as far as labeling this negative campaigning. It was simply a statement made in an email, not a funded advertisement aimed specifically at undermining the opposing candidate. I think for something to be considered "negative campaigning," there has to be money involved. Its in the candidate's instinct to promote him/herself and point out why the opponent isn't as good, hence Obama's statement.
Very true. Obama did also make a point that yet again all of his funds are raised through the people and not through any private means. These are just simply the differences in their campaign.
I agree with Obama that Clinton is involved in a large amount of negative campaigning, which i think is kinda lame. i was watching some political talkshow in which the host quoted Hillary Clinton stating that if she wins the presidency, she will "bring a lifetime of experience, and Senator Obama will bring a speech that he gave in 2002." this is a blatant attack on Obama, which i think is very low and pathetic on clinton's part. To me, she is acting defensively, and therefore is expecting defeat and trying to prevent it through desperate negative campaigning.
I would add that my respect for the Clinton campaign and some of her supporters has diminished over time partially because they have been disparaging of Obama supporters. "Get real?" "Have you drunk the kool-aid?" and suggestions that Obama fans are blind followers of a cult behind a candidate with no substance are insulting and ridiculous. This hasn't come from Mrs. Clinton as much as from online supporters, like Taylor Marsh or Hillaryis44.com. Going to those rabid pro-Clinton websites is painful, you'd think they were in a political campaign against the antichrist. The sense of entitlement conveyed by Clinton is annoying.
Negative attacks, to me, are those that take a trivial matter and blow it up out of proportion, try to exploit racial or other divisions, or are based on spurious gossip and misinformation. If the information is correct, a contrast or criticism doesn't cross the line.
Post a Comment