2007-06-22 08:56:03 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
well, he will get my respect because of it.
2007-06-22 08:59:35 · answer #1 · answered by Peace Maker 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The tide may be turning. In California last year there was a gubernatorial race between incombant Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger and Treasurer Phil Aneglides a Democrat. Most of California favors Democrats and Arnlold was an ok but not great governor. Angelides waged a very dirty campaign and lost many votes as a result. Democrats who might have voted for him were turned off by the dirt and went for Arnold or someone else rather than to vote for Phil. In the primary Angelides won over Poisner by a slim margin but Poisner also used dirty campaigning eventually but it turned out to be too little too late to squelch or undo Angelides dirt. It is like when Kerry didn't do much about the swift boat group.
2007-06-22 16:14:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He might lose this race but he'll gain a lot of respect for the next Presidential Race by doing this.
2007-06-22 16:08:46 · answer #3 · answered by Me 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The race doesn't have to be dirty. However, I am extremely sensitive to Obama's Muslim heritage. Plus, I don't agree with a thing he says.
2007-06-22 16:01:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe, but better to be an upstanding human being and lose than to be a piece of sh*t and win...I wish more people were willing to stand on their own merits instead of attacking the other guy
2007-06-22 16:03:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes. In this atmosphere, it is a way to guarantee a loss.
"campaign finance reform" wasn't actually good for the election process, it was a way to give special interest groups EVEN MORE POWER.
2007-06-22 16:11:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's a different strategy, i'll give him that. i know i'm sick of negative attack campaigns. hopefully enough people will respect his dignity. but Hillary will probably be viscious and the Republicans even more so.
2007-06-22 16:02:39 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's already started his dirty politics. Didn't yo read about the racist threat he gave in one of his speeches?
2007-06-22 17:31:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes Bush 41 lost to Clinton when he did not respond and Kerry lost to Bush 43 because he did not want to respond.
2007-06-22 16:00:38 · answer #9 · answered by Luchador 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
When your opponent is Clinton? He might as well pack it in...
If he means it... I doubt he's that naive. More likely, he's trying to score some points with voters who are sick of negative campaigning.
2007-06-22 16:01:08 · answer #10 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋