Negative Campaigning: Why Do They Do It and How To Respond

[scun10]

This year's US presidential elections are projected to put out 3.6 million political ads, with an estimated 66-70% of them being negative. Why do you think candidates use these ads? Do they get you involved or turn you off? Does one presidential candidate use more negativity than the other in your mind.

I took a stab at writing an article about this here: http://www.sarahcunningham.org/negative-advertising

I'd like to hear more solutions/ideas for how you respond to ads...feel free to disagree.

 

[uscitizen]

How to respond?
I am not voting for either one of them.

 

[blastoff]

Depends on how some people use terms like negative and attack when it comes to some ads.

Frequently just reiterating a candidate's positions, voting record, etc. is labeled going negative or attacking their opponent.

I fault the media to some extent because they're the ones doing the labeling some times, or at other times simply using the verbiage of a particular candidate when they know full well the opponent is simply stating facts about that candidate.

 

[scun10]

How to respond?
I am not voting for either one of them.

Good point. I wonder how many people get disgusted and it causes them to withdraw from the political process.

 

[Intense]

Human Nature is what it is.

 

[scun10]

Depends on how some people use terms like negative and attack when it comes to some ads.

Frequently just reiterating a candidate's positions, voting record, etc. is labeled going negative or attacking their opponent.

I fault the media to some extent because they're the ones doing the labeling some times, or at other times simply using the verbiage of a particular candidate when they know full well the opponent is simply stating facts about that candidate.

It's true. Inflammatory remarks make great headlines. But headlines only work when we click on them too...which I am sometimes guilty of.

 

[AquaAthena]

This year's US presidential elections are projected to put out 3.6 million political ads, with an estimated 66-70% of them being negative. Why do you think candidates use these ads? Do they get you involved or turn you off? Does one presidential candidate use more negativity than the other in your mind.

It has been proved that they do work. It gives the people who don't have time or desire to follow politics, all they need to make their decisions for them. The ignorant ( lack of knowledge ) think they are all true and the master minds behind the political machines know this.

 

[Some Guy]

If you don't pay close attention to things but just so happen to hear "that guy disrespected or cut something that's important to you", then you're probably more likely to remember that if/when you enter the polling places, versus remembering that "this guy wants to do something that's important to you."

If all voters were very well informed, i don't think negative campaigning would be very effective at all. But, most voters aren't very well informed.

 

[copsnrobbers]

It's not working out so well for Obama. Six months and millions of dollars bought him nothing more than pain.

LMAO!

 

[Saigon]

I think they should be illegal myself.

Candidates should talk about themselves and their policies - not lie about the other guys.

I don't know many how many countries allow them, but I've never seen one here.

 

[scun10]

Agree. Our ignorance or lazy political habits pave the way for these ads...

 

[scun10]

I think they should be illegal myself.

Candidates should talk about themselves and their policies - not lie about the other guys.

I don't know many how many countries allow them, but I've never seen one here.

It seems to me making them illegal might be an infringement on freedom of speech. But prosecuting slanderous ads that aren't true through some sort of fact-checking might be good.

Consumer product manufacturers have to take responsibility for their claims. Why not politicians?

 

[Saigon]

I think they should be illegal myself.

Candidates should talk about themselves and their policies - not lie about the other guys.

I don't know many how many countries allow them, but I've never seen one here.

It seems to me making them illegal might be an infringement on freedom of speech. But prosecuting slanderous ads that aren't true through some sort of fact-checking might be good.

Consumer product manufacturers have to take responsibility for their claims. Why not politicians?

I totally agree.

I wouldn't have a problem with them if they could be considered trustworthy, or at least accountable - but it just seems that they can make up any shit they like.

That isn't right.

 

[scun10]

I think they should be illegal myself.

Candidates should talk about themselves and their policies - not lie about the other guys.

I don't know many how many countries allow them, but I've never seen one here.

It seems to me making them illegal might be an infringement on freedom of speech. But prosecuting slanderous ads that aren't true through some sort of fact-checking might be good.

Consumer product manufacturers have to take responsibility for their claims. Why not politicians?

I totally agree.

I wouldn't have a problem with them if they could be considered trustworthy, or at least accountable - but it just seems that they can make up any shit they like.

That isn't right.

I wonder if the problem is that the legislators and judges who make and enforce slander laws are part of the political system, i.e. most often endorsed by a party?

 

[scun10]

Does anyone know of any laws that specifically govern campaign ads?