Aug 16th, 2008 | survey

Whose negative attack ads are hurting THEIR OWN side?




20 votes, 92 views , 6 comments
 
 

 
Add your comment
Update your status line


Comments (6)
Gigglybritches
(Reply)
Texas, United States

posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 14:10 CDT

Is this the part where we exchange friendship bracelets?

Bmccue7
(Reply)
Georgia, United States

posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 07:36 CDT

It's rare that I find myself agreeing with you so wholeheartedly, but in this case, I do. I was going to talk about why negative ads don't harm one's own side, but you beat me to it. I couldn't have explained it better myself.

Philgtaylor
(Reply)
Australia

posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 07:14 CDT

Eats the cookie, likes it, survives.

(Reply)
posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 06:57 CDT

Don't eat the cookie. It's poison.

Philgtaylor
(Reply)
Australia

posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 02:18 CDT

I think it also depends on how far below the belt they go, and how innaccurate they get. -thank you for the cookie:D

Gigglybritches
(Reply)
Texas, United States

posted Aug 17th, 2008 at 00:38 CDT

I work in the political field and I promise you, negative ads work. Most people are more attracted to bad news than good. Turn on any news station to see that this is so. Every candidate on the receiving end of them likes to say "I'm rubber you are glue......" but it isn't so. Rarely, if ever does a negative ad damage the otherwise healthy campaign of the candidate that launches it. If it did candidates wouldn't spend billions on their research and production. Voters like to say they are tired of negative ads but they aren't. They just lie to seem superior. Negative ads work and they work well. Shitty world isn't it? Have a cookie.

 
Log in using your:

* Username
* Email address
* Password
 
Buddy icon
* Gender
     
* Birth date
Country
City
 (your vote will still count)
Embed Flash Widget
Embed Java Script Widget
Copy & paste the embed code to your site.