How do you attack a candidate without any dirt in his background?
By Taskr36
@Taskr36 (13963)
United States
January 19, 2010 11:08am CST
Easy, find everyone WITH dirt and attack them. Then do whatever you can to link him to these people. This has become the tactic in the latest senate election in Massachusetts. Those following it will notice that none of the attacks from the left actually attack Brown or his record.
Instead, we have attacks against Tea Parties, birthers, George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh and now some idiot that shouted something obscene at one of his rallies. Personally I think it's the mark of a pretty solid person when those attacking him have to go to invent connections to such groups and people to run attack ads.
7 people like this
12 responses
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
19 Jan 10
Yes indeed they really did go digging and cannot find anything in Browns past. Compared with Obama whose past is hidden behind a veil of secrecy. Secrecy is now being used in his administration with all their underhand dealings. I think they are now shocked to find an open squeaky clean politician.
I am just praying that they will not use any cheating underhand methods to win this election!
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
19 Jan 10
"I am just praying that they will not use any cheating underhand methods to win this election!"
We are talking about politicans....remember?If they think htey can get away with it and it helps them win....they will more than likely do it.
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
19 Jan 10
Heck I am surprised they are not making up dirt to throw at him. None of them care if the dirt they are throwing is true or not....as long as it muddies the waters.
As for why they are attacking "tea party, birthers, Bush, Rush and some idiot at a rally...well last time I checked none of them for running for the office so it should not make a difference....but as I said...they could care less about what makes sense or what is right...as long as they can muddy the waters and make the candidate look bad. It does not matter if the candidate is actually bad or guilty of anytyhing....only that he or she looks bad or guilty.
It also shows how desperate they are.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
20 Jan 10
I've heard some things about this guy to make me NOT vote for him without any "dirt" being dug up, but since I'm not in Massachusetts I don't know if enough emphasis was put on them or not. Everyone knows I'm in favor of health care reform, so the fact that he's vowed to be the one to prevent it is a big deal for me. However, that's far from the only thing I'm in disagreement with him about.
He voted against giving Massachusetts firefighters who volunteered in NYC following 9/11 leaves-of-absence.
He's in favor of emergency health providers refusing to give emergency contraceptives to rape victims if it's against their personal beliefs.
He sides with Wall Street bankers instead of the American people.
Annie
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
20 Jan 10
annie, do you have sources for all those objections? not blogs or repeated stories from news agencies...but voting records as well as copies of the actual bills? what was in those bills in addition to the stated purpose?
Also, he isn't against healthcare reform in general, just the CRAP that D.C is calling healthcare reform...there is a huge difference that most democrats (and republicans) seem to almost willfully ignore in order to create a seriously flawed straw man argument.
@irishidid (8688)
• United States
20 Jan 10
"He sides with Wall Street bankers instead of the American people."
We know Obama does but what about Brown?
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
19 Jan 10
Nuh uh!, he DOES have dirt...didn't you know he posed in cosmo in his underwear almost 30 years ago? And he drives a pick up truck....I mean how redneck of him!
Yeh, He does seem to be pretty clean so far, I'm not even holding the fact that he's from Mass against him...lol. But, we'll see what happens to him after the national republican establishment gets hold of him, hopefully he has enough character to not get sucked in to that machine.
Yeh, He does seem to be pretty clean so far, I'm not even holding the fact that he's from Mass against him...lol. But, we'll see what happens to him after the national republican establishment gets hold of him, hopefully he has enough character to not get sucked in to that machine. @lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
19 Jan 10
Wait a minute....I have a truck. I not only have it, I drive it.Does that mean my political hopes and dreams are over? Say it ain't so.
@jmowreader (83)
• United States
20 Jan 10
It's hard to attack a candidate who hasn't actually DONE anything. In reality, all Brown is, is one of those conservatives who thinks tax cuts are the solution to everything.
And to the people who DO think tax cuts are the solution to everything, I have a simple request: please explain how, if high taxes stifle economic expansion, the largest expansion of real wealth in this country, which occurred between 1945 and 1965, happened in an era when the top income tax rate was 90 percent.
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
20 Jan 10
They didn't... you are operating under a false premise.
Reaganomics and the huge economic recovery spurred by that proves the fallacy of your position.
You however, are most welcome to give p90% of your income to the government. I am sure they would find a use for it.
@jmowreader (83)
• United States
20 Jan 10
Notice I said REAL wealth, not PAPER wealth.
Real wealth is creation of businesses in the four wealth-creating industries: mining, forestry, agriculture and manufacturing.
According to the Center for Economic and Policy Research's report at www.cepr/net/documents/publications/growth_failure_2007_04.pdf, usable productivity (growth that can be translated into higher wages and living standards) was 3.1 percent between 1947 and 1973;it was 1.2 percent from 1973 to 2006.
According to economics.about.com/od/useconomichistory/a/post_war.htm, the Gross National Product of the United States grew from $200 billion in 1940 to $300 billion in 1950 and to $500 billion in 1960. This is a 250 percent increase, and it was fueled by pent-up consumer demand from World War II, when no one could buy anything.
Today's GNP is much higher but a LOT of it is investments...paper wealth. In actuality, the real wealth created by this nation is far lower than it was in 1965 because we've outsourced so much of our manufacturing capability to the Pacific Rim.
@epicure35 (2814)
• United States
4 Feb 10
Ask your question to BHO, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, etc. and the filthy criminal element they are part of. Include Pelosi and Reid. Dirty people fight dirty because they are dirty and wish to intimidate others by distracting fools from their own lies, deception, and nefarious deeds. The shame of it all is, a majority of the American people are easily deceived by such sinister liars, because they can no longer discern truth themselves.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
19 Jan 10
of all the rotten, low down, despicable thing to do....... run for office with no dirt on your shirt. Maybe with his windows down a little dirt might filter in? It sure would be nice if people could bag the partisan crap when you have a good candidate. sad days sad days
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
20 Jan 10
I agree.
Brown's win is a repudiation of 0bowmao's failed policies and the socialist direction that he and this corrupt congress are trying to take this country.
The mere fact that he came from way behind in a liberal stronghold such as MA to win that election is indicative of the smackdown that the socialists are about to receive later this year.
This is true Hope and Change... and is nothing like the Utopian false promises that 0bowmao ran on.
@scarlet_woman (23465)
• United States
20 Jan 10
i live near there-that's par for the course with people candidates or not around here.
if your cousin's done something potentially embarrassing,don't run for any public job or they'll drag it out like it's your fault.
@6precious102 (4043)
• United States
20 Jan 10
There's this song from years ago which says in part, "The world reflects on everything you do and everything you do reflects on you." People need to be careful about slinging mud. That mud very often lands on them.
@tinalb (72)
• United States
20 Jan 10
I don't think that a candidate necessarily has to have dirt against him to attack him. Sometimes if you have a strong debate, you just take into consideration all the disagreements that come with it. Dirt isn't everything when it comes to voting. There could be a number of other things such as differences of belief,whether you feel like he is racist, his or her background in the way the their tactics are pointed out in the what you believe that things should be handled. Of course when it comes to digging up dirt on a particular candidate, we are most likely to find something! And if not, as in all cases, we will find something! Lol!
