It will for me. The worst mud slingers are not getting my vote. I'm tired of it.
I don't care what they stand for, they will not get my vote.
2007-12-22 10:16:30 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ok..........example. ....
Attacking someones religion when that should be nobodys business.
2007-12-22 10:24:28 · update #1
I do not condone flat out mud slinging unless that candidate that is doing it can back up their position with their record without skewing the facts.
Actually, the best stuff out of the campaigns comes from mud slinging. Look at what Guiliani did to Romney at the You Tube debates last month. All the Republicans thought that Romney was tough on immigration until they found out that he has them working at his house.
Look at Huckabee's pardon that are coming out now. How many Republicans would have expected that their own would have pardoned a murderer?
The only problem I have with mud-slinging is when not all the facts are given about the person slinging it or the person it is being slung at. Otherwise, it really does sometimes let you know who they are.
2007-12-22 10:23:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I normally vote against mud-slingers...
But recently, I discovered something:
I actually find some politicians "cry babying" to be worse than the ones who are throwing the stones...
What kind of leader will "tattle" on others for "not playing nice"?
What, are we running for kindergarten here?
I think Obama needs to grow a set or sign up as Hillary's VP...
Sorry, but he's really annoying when he cries about how mean she is...
They need to just come out and be on the same ticket at this point... but I guess they have to wait for the primaries to pull that out of the hat.
2007-12-22 18:30:16 · answer #2 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would depend on what you consider "mud slinging".
There are times when you HAVE to disparage your opponent's policies. If you're referring to only personal attacks, then I would agree with you, but criticizing an opponent's policies HAS to be allowed (provided he or she has a viable alternative; criticism without viable altenraitves WOULD be considered mudslinging).
Mostly, as Ive written in here before, I tend to base my vote on whoever upsets and discomforts the power elite so much, the opposition party cannot even agree what they hate about him or her.
2007-12-22 18:22:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
From what I see, usually the people who are busy mudslinging generally do not present any solid ideas of their own on how to turn around problem issues.
So I will vote for people who show they have some real ideas, not just generalities. And most likely those are going to be people who werent busy doing teh mudslinging.
2007-12-22 18:20:50 · answer #4 · answered by sociald 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Spot on- most of the top tier candidates have more skeletons in their closets than Hitler, Stalin & Mao combined, and I'm not voting for some scandalous criminal!
I'm voting for one who sticks straight to the issues, and who is HONEST (It only seems like there's one left...)
2007-12-22 18:21:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I love mud slinging, especially when their both wearing bikinis.
2007-12-22 18:28:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because everybody does it, to some degree. Romney, Guiliani, Huckabee and McCain have all done it. Hilliary, Obama, Edwards have all done it on the Democratic side. Everybody does it, so no, it won't affect me. I vote on the issues, period.
2007-12-22 18:20:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes.
I love Mud-Slinging.
We wouldn't have found out that Obama was a Muslim Dopehead, if it hadn't been for the Clintons.
2007-12-22 18:18:53 · answer #8 · answered by everbrook 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Exactly why I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton.
2007-12-22 18:19:21 · answer #9 · answered by You 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋