Polls tighten, should Obama go negative?
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The polls indicate the presidential race is tightening.
CNN's latest poll of polls shows Barack Obama leading John McCain by just one point - 45 to 44 percent. That's down from a 3-point lead in yesterday's average of polls and down considerably from a few weeks ago.
While Obama was vacationing in Hawaii last week - McCain had the stage almost all to himself. Suddenly the Russians rolled into Georgia and McCain was in the catbird seat. Also some of McCain's negative ads - a la Paris Hilton and Britney Spears "celebrity" spot - seem to have resonated with voters. And it looks like McCain made inroads with some members of the Republican base with his interview at Rick Warren's church.
Watch: Cafferty: Obama go negative?
All of this creates a problem for Barack Obama who has gone out of his way to run a positive campaign based on the issues, and for the most part has chosen not to engage in the schoolyard stuff that characterizes U.S. politics. He may no longer have that luxury.
Obama is now out with some hard-hitting tv ads running in local markets in key battleground states. He spent 400-thousand dollars on Sunday alone to run two negative spots - more than 600 times - focusing on the economy and McCain… in places like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida.
These new ads have been complemented with a tougher tone on the stump where Obama is going after McCain for saying Iraqis would greet Americans as liberators and for challenging Obama's patriotism.
Some Democratic strategists say Obama's aggressive tone reflects the reality of the race and say he should have gotten tougher sooner.
Here’s my question to you: In light of tightening polls, does Barack Obama have to go negative against John McCain?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Beth writes:
McCain's negatives speak for themselves. All Obama has to do is put up that picture of him hugging Bush and the statistic that he has voted for what Bush wanted 95% of the time.
Erin from SW Michigan writes:
I think he should go "ugly truth" which is different than the distorted, fear mongering tactics of the right. There is so much ugly truth about McCain yet the mainstream media is reluctant to introduce it. They are waiting for the Obama camp or MoveOn to launch the attack and then the media can "pick-up" on it as a legitimate issue of debate. The problem is...Obama won't throw the punch and McCain goes unscathed.
Brian writes:
Sen. Obama's biggest problem is his lack of experience. The Republicans didn't need Hillary to point that out-it was obvious that would be his weakness. Going negative will not change that. The only thing that will counter his lack of experience is a VP that he can lean on. Unfortunately the obvious choice would send "Obamatons" into fits, so November is looking gloomy for left-leaners.
Michael from Lorain, Ohio writes:
I think Hillary already showed us once this year that waiting till the eleventh hour to lob the kitchen sink at the opposition doesn't work. So yeah, Jack, he should go negative now and keep it centered on the issues. Sadly it does tarnish his reputation of being a new kind of politician.
Mark from Denver writes:
What? Obama went negative along time ago. Who are you trying to BS? All Obama does is say how much McCain is like Bush, how McCain is this or not that. Portray McCain in a bad light and offer platitudes up to the masses. Such depth to his intellect. Jimmy Carter II here we come.
Kevin from Kennesaw, Georgia writes:
Who answers their landline anymore anyway? I use my land line like a personal business phone. I do not even screen calls I just check my messages. Everyone that is important to someone has their cell phone numbers. I think the polls are disproportionate to the elderly.
@jackcafferty on Twitter
yes
Jack, it's unfortunate that sleaze and lies seem to work for the GOP. Obama has to start going negative, but he can do it cleanly. There are certainly more than enough examples of McCain's stupidity, pandering, lies, immoral behavior and the like that Obama doesn't have to resort to sleaze and lies. Just getting the truth about McCain out there should be enough to defeat him.
No.He needs to stay positive and on-message. The 527s, the DNC, and his VP candidate can go negative. He needs to continue to inspire us to how an Obama Presidency will be different than any other presidency we have ever seen.
Jack,
No I don't think so. As time goes on and the public notices that McCain has nothing to say except to bash Obama they will begin to support Obama and his ideas. We need a leader that can think and not just criticize.
Dave
Iowa City, Iowa
No, not at all. He only has to be himself to lose this election for the Democrats. The Republicans gave this election to the Democrats by electing George Bush 8 years ago. The only way the Democrats should lose this election is by voting for the wrong candidate which they did. They deserve exactly what they get and there is no turning back now.. We reap what we sow!!!!
You can call it negative but I think Obama should point out McCain's positions on women's rights, his voting record on veteran's affairs and his lie about Iraq being safe when Michael Ware reported if you strolled to the market like McCain suggested you wouldn't last a minute.
Obama should also point out McCain's lie about the cross in the dirt as he played to the religous wackos.
No. Although he should have his surrogates do it for him.
I have always said, never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter. Give them sound bites mixed in with a little fear mongering, pandering and jimgoism and they will vote for you. That's why it's so hard to elect anyone in this country that believes in thought processes.
Not that the media helps! They also pander to the lowest common denominator in the electorate. Otherwise McCain's Georgia lobbyist connection would be on the front pages!
Jack, Barack Obama should not resort to the Mudslinging negativity one might hear coming from the right wing talking head radio hosts but he should be reminding the voters that John McCain is a republican like bush, and kow-towing to the oil companys like bush, and obcessed with war like bush, and beholden to the rich like bush,and, well you know, "bush" league.
No. He needs to keep on the message of change. It is the job of Republicans to smear you into a greasy spot.
Jack,
I think its that time. Americans only understand dirty politics and that really is a real shame.
"To thine own self be true." Obama simply needs to be who he is. We voters need to demand our right to choose our government.
Let's demand an end to Republican so called "dirty tricks." never again the loser appointed president by the Supreme Court. Never again an election accepted with so many "voting irregularities" that the GAO can't determine who actually won.
No. Barrack needs to stress his own attributes, who he will choose to asssist him, admit his lack of experience and open up to the voters on substantive issues and specifically how he wil address them. He needs to shorten his sentences, tone down his arrogance, find someone other than Michelle as his wisest mentor. It would also be prudent to submit his application for his old community organizer job in Chicago and consider becoming Oprah's car dealer.
Charles
Central, SC
Jack!
I hate to say yes, but if that what needs to be done then I say he must do what he has to do. YES.
If 'going negative' means digging up dirt on John McCain, most certainly.
McCain already has and has said 'of Corsi can', so too shall Barack.
Bernie
Lowell, MA
Not negative but much more succinct and forceful. When Senator Obama reverts to attempts to please everybody he satisfies nobody, Let him say exactly what he means and let us the beleaguered middle glass fervently hope he means what he says. He has the votes of our family of four.
Yes,Obama has to go negative to rebut the the lies and slander put out by the republican smear machine. It is just so sad that the intelligence level of the United States has fallen so low that being honest and honorable does not matter. It is why the government is full of self-serving,back-stabbing scum. We,the people,allowed it to sink this low. We should be ashamed.
No.
Barack's success so far has rested on his positive message of hope. By giving in to the politics of fear as McCain has done would go against every thing Barack has stood for. I believe most people will chose hope over fear in November.
Ray Kinserlow
Lubbock, Texas
Naw. It's the state-by-state electoral count, stupid.
Besides, Obama doesn't do "nasty". He'll make the facts clear and even dumb it down for those who need it. (He can give three word answers like McCain, when pressed.)
Boise, ID
Jack, exposing John McCain for what and who he really is, is NOT going negative. It is saving the American people from themselves. McCain is a typical Washington politician that has played dirty politics for 26 years. Additionally, he's a womanizer that has reportedly cheated on BOTH of his wives. Not to mention he wants to continue economic policies that have BANKRUPT this great country.
If Americans want "morality" and sound judgement in the White House, a light needs to be shined on the life and practices of John McCain.
I really don't believe McCain can win. All these polls a useless and reflect NOTHING. It's just a bunch of fat people who stay at home and answer polls. That being said, if Obama screws up and doesn't pick Hillary as VP, it could be close.
Should McCain win, Canada here I come because this country will be seriously screwed!
With all the negative ads the McCain puts out, and the constant barrage of smear tactics that GOP supporters spew out, it would be very tempting. I don't think anyone would blame him if he did. However, I don't think he will. One of the best things Obama has going for him is the fact that he hasn't stooped to their level. If he ever does, he will be regarded as just another old school politician like the rest.
And to Richard McKinney, Texas:
America DESERVES John McCain!
Who are they polling?Where are they polling? People don't have home phones anymore. Those that do are older americans who are not into the whole cell phone thing. I think these polls are very deceiving and do not paint the correct picture. If he goes negative he is dropping down to the gutter with John McCain and since I don't like what John McCain is doing, I would not want Obama to do that. He is different and a very positive man. I don't think he should let the lies and rantings of an old, out of touch ,typical washington politician make him change. It would ruin his postive message.
No he should not go negative. To me he should be patient and wait for the debates and then let McCain talk about Iraq, Iraq, and Iraq. Obama going negative shows that he has become just like the rest of the people in Washington. I beleive overall, other than Karl Rove, are tired of the negativity of politics.
no because the polls do not mean anything. it is all just speculation and games for the news networks to bump up the ratings but who care??? polls do not matter just like the popular vote.
They do not have to go negative, but...
1. The Obama campaign ads should stop preaching to the choir
2. They need to make ads for people who voted for Bush. Twice.
3. For people do not trust politicians anymore.
4. For people leave the room when a political ad comes on TV
5. They need to make ads for people who hate Obama
6. Ads that do not have Bush or McCain or Obama in the ads
7. They need a messenger the people can trust.
8. People should LIKE the ads. Duh.
9. The campaign will ignore what I am saying.
10. They ignored it in Puerto Rico and Obama lost by 36 points.
I don't call it negative when you tell the truth.
He needs to tell the people about the real McCain: the one who graduated 5th from the bottom of his class, the one who has been in Washington 26 years and has not brought about significant change, the one who could have done something about health care, taxes, large corporations going off shore, nafta, education, the one who supports war, war, war and bomb, bomb, bomb. They need to replay McCain singing, "bomb, bomb Iran" over and over and over!!
Obama shouldn't go negative anymore than he already has. It would be a breath of fresh air and good for our country, if these guys would talk only about resolving important issues and drop the usual partisan rhetoric.
I feel he should, Jack, but that would be politics as usual, which
he is against. Someone needs to strongly point out all of
Mccains blunders, lies and dirty tactics. After the religious
debate it is obvious the man will stoop to the lowest level.
He should not and cannot get away distorting his votes,
his non support of peoples rights, his throwing veterans
to the wind, his strong support of big corporations, and
total lack of knowlege about middle class America.
He needs to be exposed for what he is. A complete
fraud.
I would much rather vote for a candidate who tells me what he or she is for as opposed to what's wrong with the other guy. Otherwise, the premise of the candidates' arguments becomes "Look, I don't have any great ideas to sell you on, but look how bad the other guy is!" It's a sad state of affairs these days.
Jack: Americans have been taught to believe that negative equals realistic and positive equals unrealistic, which is a falsehood. Obama needs to be deliberate with nation's issues at hand and continue to campaign with caution and decisiveness; and he must be able to yield with graciousness or oppose with firmness, not negativity. Hillary Clinton orchestrated a negative campaign against Obama, and by doing so dug herself into a hole....and if you're already in a hole, it's no use to continue digging. He must continue the path that he has designed and not be baited to deviate from that path.
he needs to walk like a buterfly and sting like a
hell fire missle
No, that would be simply going back on what he said he would do. McCain already flip flopped from when he said he would run a clean campaign and Obama is above that. I don't think it's terribly difficult to point out McCain's incompetence without being negative.
Absolutely not. He's just got to understand that it's okay for him to respond with truth to McCain's idiocies. For example, McCain's comment on the 5 million dollars rich nonsense at Saddleback... Barack should just clearly state the McCain was being evasive and never has no idea what American make or even considers what other people lives are like. The problem here is that Americans aren't bright people and it's beyond Obama's comprehension that American could actuallly be that stupid. I know how he feels, I've been struggle with how stupid Americans are for a long time.
Is there a way to "go negative" without lowering your standards? Problem is, the other size has NO scruples. So what do you do? There is so much dirt that hasn/t even been touched concerning McCain. It' would be nice if someone other that Obama himself could scratch the surface a little. I'd hate to think that someone in this country could be elected on the basis of fear and lies. (again).
If he has to go negative then all hope that I have for the future of this
country is shattered. Fight back to dispel the McCain lies and half
truths, yes.
But act as that spoiled petty little man does, absolutely not.
Absolutely NOT! Obama should stick to the issues. He should remain a good, loyal, honest and honorable American – someone all parties can respect for his proactive, positive, solution-driven campaign!
Negative campaigning sickens me and everyone I know. Anyone who fights dirty is NOT someone I want leading my country and making choices about issues that affect me.
Obama should quickly and casually dismiss the negative attacks and continue to focus on great things he'll do as President!
No, but he does need to get more aggressive. He needs to not stoop to McCain's campaign's level, while still hitting McCain's anti-Veteran stance (in spite of his being a POW), McCain's overly aggressive stance and questionable connections through lobbyists, and McCain's genuinely frightening temper and loss of memory.
Obama first of all needs to defend himself better against the attacks. He is allowing himself to be defined by McCain's negative soundbite ads.
What Obama has to do, is to redefine McCain. McCain should be an easy target for negative attacks. Let me explain why. Everyone thinks they know McCain. He's familiar. He's been around. But the truth is, who the heck really knows what he's going to do when he gets in office?? He's obviously not the maverick any more. He's gone against every one of his core beliefs to court the 'agents of intolerance' and the supporters of 'the irresponsible tax cuts'.
But what happens when he gets elected? My guess. He drops the ones he used to get elected faster than a hot potato, and does whatever the heck he wants. And who can say what exactly that is going to be?? He's done so many 180s I don't think anyone can predict what his true policies will be.
He will not have to, nor should he go negative. He WILL have to start adressing lies and character assasination when they are told on behalf of or by John McCain. Too many Americans believe everything they see in the media. Time and again we have seen how the Republican machine has used the media to lie to the American people to achieve its' goals, yet we still don't learn. If Obama does not counteract that Republican machine then he will become an interesting footnote in history and not a US president.
No, I do not think by going negative, Obama will defeat McCain. Maybe, if he had the power to change his color, He may have a chance. Jack, the problem in this country is that people react to fear and the Republican Party/McCain's tactics plays on this. The Iraqui war was the tool used in the last election and believe it or not, there are a number of uninformed people out there who are afraid that a person of color will hurt them. Can you tell me which past election required a candidate to have"experience"? Also, has it ever occurred to anyone that this country has skid loads of experienced people in office today that placed us in the position we are in today. It is a shame that people outside of this country are more open minded than we are.
He does need to find ways to put the McCain campaign on defense. Right now they are in full attack mode and not having to defend his own record and some of the really bad gaffes he's made in recent months. If it takes some negative ads to turn the spotlight back on McCain, so be it.
He already has Jack, but I can hardly blame him. Obama just spent millions on local attack adds against McCain this week, while running positive national spots. It's a way for him to press his financial advantage and let's be honest, people need to hear about the real McCain. Let's hear some more stuff about his biggest moral failure, his first marriage.
I think people are saying we should do what we did in 2000 and 2004.
Wait until the Democrats lose and then try to figure out who to blame.
I do not think Obama should go negative because the race for the leader of our nation should not be a mud slinging contest. Personally I think if someone is swayed by attacks they should not even be allowed to vote. Long gone are the days where votes are determined by what the candidate actually stands for, and I think Obama is one of the few true candidates we have had in a long time. McCain would gain a lot of credit to me if he simply stopped the negativity. At least then the presidential race would be true.
Obama can stay on message even though it seems to be quite away over the heads of a lot of people.
Outside organizations should and likely will drag up all McCain's skeletons and point out all his lies and confused responses.
However, to be on the safe side if McCain does manage to get elected people with a younger family might be well advised to immigrate to another country because there will be endless conflicts and a draft.
His entire run for office has been like a popular band concert on tour. It seems more like a circus then a man running for president of the United States. I'm thinking he can do what ever he wants and his followers will back him up. I've been waiting for him to get a cheer leading squad to travel with him so they could stand behind him and yell "Give me an O". Don't want to get into race but I'm telling you Jack, if this would have been a white male with 2 years in the Senate everyone would have laughed him off the stage. Sad but true.
Jack,
Barack does not need to go negative but he does need o stay on his current course of staying tough on McCain, especially in response to the outright lies being stated by McCain and his 527's.
Mr. Obama need not sink to the level of Mr. McCain's antics. However, he must forcefully rebut false and twisted information diseminated by the McCain campaign. He must show emotion...and I guess he should lower his vocabulary and content to that of MCain, since it appears that the American people are easily impressed by McCain's halting and simplistic speeches. The Saddleback "discussions" were excruciating for me as McCain blurted out his campaign themes. Mr. Obama on the otherhand had thoughtful answers. This appeared lost on the American people AND the pundits. So...negative no...but forceful rebuttals and more simplistic content is apparently needed. Kind of sad...isn't it?
Jack, I think Obama should do two things: First, he should put out an ad that says he would never stoop to the level of character assassination, as his opponent is doing with the help of the same Rove disciples who got Bush elected 8 years ago. Secondly, he should play his own "3 a.m." ad that asks the question, "Who do you want answering that phone? Someone whose first instinct is war and finger goes right to the trigger, or someone who actually thinks about the right approach and considers peace first?"
Rebecca in Palm Desert
If Obama is about change he should not go negative. John McCain is of the old politics where he will do anything and say anything to win. Obama has inspired all Americans. Bush was a Washington outsider and won the election by saying he would change Washington. Obama is also green when it comes to old Washington Politics. The difference between Obama and Bush/McCain is that Obama is on the same wavelength when it comes to the issues that matter the most. I will not vote for either Obama or McCain if Obama starts to go negative.
Obama is trying to campain like an adult,McCain like a child.Obama has asked him many times to keep it civil,but he does not.McCain will regret it, because there is plenty of filth on this creep.
The best either candidate can do for themselves is to stick with the issues and how each intends to react with them. Leave the mud and muck throwing to those individuals and groups who enjoy wallowing around in a verbal pig pen.
Negativity is a very slippery slope, especially for Obama since it will also negate his stand that represents "change" from politics as usual.
kerry diehl
grosse ile, mi
Barack Obama cannot go negative. His support is from folks who abhor "politics as usual," so if he were to go negative it would disappoint his base. None of us want him to grovel in the cesspool with McCain.
And it is important to realize that setting the record straight and revealing negative ads and rhetoric for the lies that they are is NOT negative campaigning. It is integrity, something we have rarely seen in politics in my lifetime.
Polls are polls, nothing more. November will tell the tale.
And McCain will be toast.
Jack,
It is time for Obama to show some stregnth and drill, drill, drill Mccain a new one.
Joe St Louis, MO
yes thanks to the clintons!!..mccain is using her playbook and his camp is taking advantage of it..obama needs to bring out mccain's lies as well his past when it comes to corruption such as the keating five scandal..mccain doesn't care about poor and the middle classes only the rich...the united states of america will continue to suffer without having jobs, healthcare benefits, housing crisis etc..obama needs to re-engerize his message and get out new voters..hit hard, hit hard, hit hard now!!..don't be weak obama, beat old mccain up now!!..
No. Obama should continue to stand for a new kind of politics. He needs to keep telling people "forget the polls", because they all are based on outdated formulas for "likely voters". Obama will bring a lot of people to the polls who never would have voted before. He needs to start reminding people of that, and it wouldn't hurt a few in the media to acknowledge it, as well...back to you Wolf.
I am from Memphis, Tennessee. If by "negative' you mean should he continue to clear up the lies and inuendos of lack of patriotism, not caring for his fellow man, sacrificing the safety and well-being of the troops to realize his own ambitions, as Senator McCain insist on spreading, then Senator Obama has no choice, but to go negative. Senator McCain had one thing going for him at the beginning of the primaries, and that was his word to run a campaign on issues. So, with that gone, he literally has nothing else to offer the American people because he has already given of himself when he chose to serve time in the military, and the country owes him a great deal of gratitude for that service. However, that gratitude does not mean that he is somehow "entitled" to the Whitehouse nor does his service mean that he is imminently more qualified than Senator Obama or any other person running for the office.
Jack,
Obama does not have to go negative, but it's time to "release the hounds." Let his VP pick loose to point out McCain's lies distortions and errors in judgment, and if it's Joe Biden, McCain and his wife will soon have more than an arm in a sling. McCain has been getting away with murder these past few months thanks to most of the media (present company excluded) avoiding reports on anything negative. It’s time to shine a light on this dirty little campaign and light up things too numerous to list here (it’s only a three hour show.)
Someone
has to
say it out loud.
McCain's campaign lies. Consistently.
McCain's policies are incoherent.
McCain's grasp of rudimentary factual sequences is suspect.
McCain has no vision to bring this country out of the muck and mire.
If that is negative, then my answer is
YES.
Yes! If Obama goes negative, he'll be telling the truth and stating the obvious. How can anything remotely positive be said about the last eight years of Republican rule? It has been a long, hard overload of negative.
Obama should continue to take the high road, Jack, because that's obviously who he really is.
He needs knowledgeable and disciplined surrogates who will attack McCain's many weekly gaffes and blunders, refute his attacks, and point out–over and over–how McCain will be four more years of Bush.
It's not "going negative" when you keep hitting back hard by telling the truth A smart and honest VP–like Clark or Biden–could do this, and let Obama continue talking about the issues we Americans care about.
People generally don't like the bashing. Let McCain keep up his negativity – in the end it will work against him. Besides – just listening to all his flip-flops, and his parroting of Bush policies is all the American public needs to hear. When they finally debate, McCain will be showed up – Obama has speaking skills way above him. If he can't read it – McCain doesn't have an answer.
Hi Jack,
Polls, polls, polls, are old. Just verify one thing for me, one of your biggest fans. When they take these polls, do they only call home phone numbers? If the polls they run to show who's ahead and by how much, don't include cell phones. Then that's why McCain is so close. So get the word out to all the worried Democrate's. Most of Obama's base have cell phones, like younger voters & college students. Oh and please tell McCain, Lou Dobbs, Bill & Hillary Clinton. They should worry. Don't underestimate his base.
Gina
Indianapolis, In
P.S.
Oh, please don't mention Bill & Hillary on the air. You konw, that UNITY thing. ( sure)
Yes he has to go negative but he can't without it backfiring on him. His message is a new kind of politics and he's already tarnished it by flip flopping. He doesn't need to add salt into the wound by playing dirty. But if he doesn't, McCain will continue to cut into his lead. Its a lose lose situation. All he can do is hope that this lead he has will go on till November.
Positive, Upbeat, Inspirational. That's how Obama wins. The more negative this campaign gets, the less likely that new voters will go to the polls. I shudder to think that we will end up with the same old voting patterns that we have seen in the past. If Obama can excite new, younger and not so young voters, we can change the way we conduct politics in this country. He doesn't have to stoop to the Swift Boat level.
Sadly, most people seem to respond to fear, rather than hope.
Obama needs to tell his positive story as a counter to McCain's smears, but also point out the big negatives about McCain: that he has sold his soul for power and that he would cause frightful things to happen if elected, like more wars, more deficits, more environmental ruin and more hard times for most Americans.
Obama doesn't need to go negative, he just needs to be factual and turn the tables on McCain by defining McCain instead of the other way around. He must unveil the real McCain and the fact that his voting record is almost in lock-step with George W. Bush, that McCain is so out of touch with the economic pain Americans are feeling that he praises how well things have been going over the past couple of years, that McCain's energy policy is squarely aimed at helping the oil companies, and that McCain's temperament is downright scary when it comes to being our Commander-in-Chief.
He doesn't have to go negative.He just has to show the American people how McCain has voted on NUMEROUS
issues ( the G.I. bill, torture, tax breaks for the wealthy )... that ought to be enough! Oh, he should keep on showing America
how he was a big part of the Bush team pushing us into the Iraq war.
Not that he has to but he already has. Every speech I hear from him, he mentions McCain's name in a negative manner. Instead of saying what John did, he should be saying what he is going to be doing differently. He is very vague in his solutions and his change theme is hypocritical when he has both Clintons speaking at the Convention and possibly Biden as VP. Where is the change? His judgment should also be questioned because if it wasn't for the sex scandal, he was going to pick Edwards. Either way, I see a man who lacks clear judgment and flip flops too much!!!
Wildwood Crest, NJ
Obama should play the fear card, Namely, McCain is far more likely to initiate a nuclear war with Russia over Georgia.
Yes and no.
Yes, because a majority of the American electorate is so stupid that they don't understand anything else.
No....but as a previous comment suggested, his Vice-Prez choice can play attack dog. If that's his strategy, pick Joe Biden (and his first job will be to dispell the plagiarism issue of many years ago). If he wants to negate much of the inexperience and commander-in-chief crap, then pick Chuck Hagel.
(Sigh!!)
Jack,
All they need is just to keep putting McCain into situations where ihas to think on his feet. His responses will do the rest . I say take the high road but be ready to hit back if necessary.
Rather than going negative, which would compromise his integrity, he should adopt a strong populist voice contrasting his commitment to fight for the middle class to McCain's commitment to corporations and lobbyists. He needs to speak with passion to arouse people around their needs to deflate McCain's deadpan focus on tax cuts and militarism. He doesn't need to 'go negative' to show powerful emotion about what really matters to the lives of Americans.
Obama should keep hitting McCain with the truth. That should be negative enough.
Obama probably needs to go more on the offensive, but he doesn't have to go negative. If this country wants a president whose only big skill is spouting negative soundbites, they deserve John McCain.
He needs to go negative on the issues. It did not help matters when he took that week's vacation in the middle of the campaign. He needs to take a page out of Hilliary's play book. This is politics not brain surgery; don't be another Mike Dukakis!
I'm not sure if "go negative" is the right phrase. Questioning one's patriotism is going negative. All the Obama team has to do is aggressively tell the truth about McCain- his flip-flops, his pandering, his Bushian lack of knowledge. And here's a slogan they can use... McCain: The Worst of Regan & The Worst of Bush.
Jon Goldstein,
Las Vegas
Sure why not. Be like Hillary and look what happened. Of course Hillary and her campaign gave McCain the ammunition against Obama. And they're using it to the hill. So maybe if Obama would go negative we might get to see McCain lose his temper and show his true colors.
I live in Barack's home state of Hawaii. I work for a cell phone company. More than half of the generation under thirty years of age does not have a land line. I know this for a fact because I ask people every single day. The youth of this country are not being accurately reflected in the polls. They are heavily in favor of Barack Obama. Barack does not need to go negative. He is much farther ahead than the polls indicate.
Jack
Both candidates have already gone negative BUT there are two kinds of negative.
One is to truthfully criticize your opponent's record by pointing out where he stands and why you think he's wrong. For those of us old enough to remember, this is how Harry Truman "gave 'em hell".
The other type of negative is to falsify your opponent's record and vilify his character, his motives and his patriotism.
Senator Obama practices the first type of negative; Senator McCain the second.
Pablo in Arlington, Texas
No, because Obama is essentially a decent gentleman and I believe it would go against his grain to go negative. For john mccain it seems to come naturally. I am one of those people that believe goodness will always have the last word. And honestly the more the repugs go negative i have noticed it is turning more of their own party off. They are a wicked party whose foundation is greed and they will suffer because of it.
Yes, and Obama should start out by challenging the false assumption that McCain has all the right experience. It could be done in John McCain's own words...doesn't know internet skills or the economy, needs to rest more or he's not sharp, ran for President not to advance any agenda but because he was ambitious, voted with President Bush 95% of the time, and doesn't think that in the 21st century one country should invade another.
Jack, what choice does Obama have? We, the American electorate, are a fickle bunch with a short attention span. If he does not attack, then we call him "weak". If he does attack, he is "mean".
Thomas Jefferson said the education system was put into place to make the electorate smarter. I wonder what he would think now?
Jack,
Of course not. Obama is playing the media and the McCain campaign for fools. Right now is the last lull in the campaign season before it hits a constant fever pitch for the next two months, and if you watch the polls, they go closer and farther like the tides. Right now, Obama is letting McCain get closer by staying out of the national media. But wait until the VP announcement and convention media onslaught – then watch the bump he's going to get. Except it won't be a bump, it will rise, rise and plateau – McCain won't have a chance.
Brian Rich
Moscow, Idaho
Jack, I do not think Obama should go negative. McCain has no choice but to go negative because that is all he has. His military ceredential are warying thin and once the Vice Presidents are picked and the Conventions are over, it a whole new ball game. It will no longer be about Hilliary Clinton, all the negative books will have been read and the time will come for the American people, including the Republicans to decide if they want four more years of a corrupted Washington and Bush polices or do they want to change it. I would like to think that the American people will be smarter this time around.
1. Dirty plays breed dirty plays.
2. If BO really wants to go negative, ask BC & HC for advice who are past masters of the craft.
NO Jack. Senator Obama does not need to go negative on McCain. He needs to stay on message and let the 527's and the DNC sling the mud at Senator McCain. The mud they sling, however, should be truthful mud and plenty of it.
No, Obama does not need to go negative. All he HAS to do is to tell the truth about McCain and that in itself is scary enough. I agree with Rebecca's comment about the 3 am ad as I believe McCain would answer the phone and send the USA straight into another war we shouldn't be in!!! I am SO disappointed in the American voter that they do not have the intelligence to ignore negative campaigning, and, unfortunately they believe all the dirt. Who was it that said they were going to run an HONORABLE campaign? Oh yes, I remember, McCain...........apparently his definition of honorable is cheap and dirty tactics!
OBAMA 08
No, I've been impressed with this election cycle this term due to the fact that I see America starting to judge its candidates on pure issues. I am sorry to see Mr. McCain going so Negative but I guess if you're fighting from behind all's fair. I only wish Mr. McCain would stop telling lies about his opponent and use facts. Too question someone patriotism or their religious beliefs makes me wonder just how desperate he is?
NoJACK , Sen. Obama needs to stay positive and stay on the issues.Speaking as a proud American I'm tired of all this mud slinging and mess. I want to hear what kind of problem solving and step each one is going to take to make this country work again. thats what we as a people need to hear not all this other mess.
No. He shouldn't go negative as long as the Rassmussen Balance of Power Calculator shows him winning the election if it were to be held today. Rassmussen says he would get 273 electoral votes and
be our next President.
It would be a shame if his campaign handlers revert to the dark days of pre-Obama, and devolve to the typical mud slinging and name calling that is historicaly American politics. Unfortunately, candidates don't appear to have any say-so in their own campaigns, even the ones who built their reputation on change.
Hi Jack,
I say go for it! What does Obama have to lose? McCain has shown that he has no respect to have a civil campaign focused on the issues. We would rather elect a liar and a cheat to run this country as opposed to someone with honesty and integrity. After November 4, we will be asking ourselves "would you like some cheese to go with that whine?"
He would not need to if the media really did the job they are paid to do – be impartial, and report the facts!
Jack,
In Obama's case negative attacks should come from whomever he chooses to be VP. Because of the racial maelstrom that threatens to surface in this election, Obama can't afford to be mischaracterized as an uppity boor. Let a Joe Biden attack McCain's understanding of global issues or a Jim Webb confront his military IQ.
Those polls don't mean squat. Senator Obama is winning and everyone knows it and that is why the McCain campaign is acting to desperate. There is no need for Obama to go negative, as McCain does damage to himself every time he opens his mouth. I can hardly wait for the debates!
It is really sad, that a young man who was determined to run a clean campaign, will either have to go negative, ot lose to McCain who has shown he has no morals, no sense, and no memory of what he said on any given day. And now there are those who think his hot temper caused the Pres of Georgia to start this fiasco which has taken us back years, into a new cold war.
I hope he doesn't go that route. Let Rove continue to be the one who creates character attack ads that have nothing whatsoever to do with the issues facing our country.
Obama: Don't go negative, dude. Please don't.
I detest negative campaigns, and in all the many years I have been voting, I have never seen anyone better at it than than the Bushes and McCain, who is now following the campaign tactics as laid down by Carl Roves and his minions. Has Sen. McCain forgotten what Bush and Rove did to him in 2000? Is he not mentally capable of winning on his own merits?
Sen. Obama needs to select a V P who can take on McCain's lying rhetoric so that Mr. Obama can continue to come across to the country as he did during the primaries. Maybe someone should find the Bush/Rove bloodbath tapes used against McCain and trot them out for the current McCain campaign. Losing honorably is infinitely better than winning at any cost, and Mr. McCain should know that.
Since McCain started the negative Ads first, Obama needs to hit back.
We all know what happen when John Kerry did not answer the negative ads about him. Obama needs to attack McCain now. The Polls show McCain gaining ground and that is in part to his negative Ads.
I thought he was negative
I don't care what Obama does, but he has to fight back harder
As a Canadian all I can say, GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL IN THE USA if McCain wins.
He is worse than Bush if that is possible.
I don't think Obama has to become negative. All Obama needs to do is quote what is on McCain's record for the last 28 years regarding education, health care, social security and medicare, globalization and de-regulation which partially caused the economic mess we are in now. What are McCain's votes on maintaining and upgrading infrastructure and on past and present things like Rwanda, Darfur, and Kosovo. Plus how many times did he vote for corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks and subsidies as the corporations were moving jobs overseas? For that matter what is both candidates votes on in-sourcing and outsourcing of jobs. If Obama can't beat McCain on his record alone then he won't be able to beat him at all.
Geri – Mead, OK
Yes – qualified that Obama should attack hard on the issues and McCain's polices. Considering McCain has had a pretty corrupt career and flipflops so much, Obama has a big target to come out brawling hard. Go for it!
Jack –
Yes, Obama must go negative. Furthermore, he must fully utilize those two great negative attack dogs Hillary and Bill Clinton. The only way to get their full throated participation is to name Hillary Clinton as V.P. Only then will the Democratic team be as tough and hard edged as the Republican team.
Jack,
I want to add to my previous blog...No Obama shouldn't go negative against McCain. However....
I think Obama should start turning McCain's attacks back onto McCain. For example, McCain talks about Obama being a 'rock star' due to his popularity. Obama's response can be as simple as, 'Yes, I am popular just like a rock star...what's the problem?' Or how about the rumors that Obama is Muslum? Obama's response can be as simple as my 'Christian' brothers, 'I'm a Christian and not a Muslum but why would it matter if I were a Muslum?'
Should Obama go negative if he wants my vote he won't . Obamas backing is negative enough. Some of us would like to have his message of what he will do not who he can slander.
Carol in Oregon
Has he any choice? perhaps not, because time and time again it has worked well for the side that does it. So why not speak in Red tones, attack and counter attack or be seen as a whip. The question will be just how smart is he at it?
What can he go negative with? McCain...or his surrogates rather, have enough to write books, just wait until that whole Obama Nation book turns into a series of commercials. We have not skimmed the top of how negative this is going to get.
He doesn't have to. No matteer who McCain picks as runninig mate. But most especially if he goes with Zel (Joe)_Lieberman. That wouild top all negatives.
In a word – yes. Unfortunately, we live in a culture where people very often lift themselves up by putting others down. To equal McCain's "Paris & Britney" ad, Obama would have to create an ad portraying McCain as a cranky old man. But that would bring Obama down to the Republcans' level.
Ideally Obama's campaign should point out the relevent negative aspects of McCain's record and positions – The fact that he doesn't know the difference between Sunni and Shi'a, that he thinks Czecholslovakia still exists and that he supports an off-shore drilling policy that even oil companies acknowledge would do nothing to lower oil prices – long or short-term. But we all know that most of the American people don't respond as well to logic as they do to smear tactics.
I would not be surprised if Obama decided to get in the mud with McCain. Fight fire with fire. That's politcs.
I don't think Senator Obama needs to lower the lever of integrity and play the same way McCain does. People want hear about plans and solutions, not hear one candidate talk trash about the other one. The thing with McCain, is that his age resembles experience, and also race might another factor. In my opinion he shouldn't change to a negative campaing, but I think he might do it to help himself a little.
Considering people vote, not to get someone in office, but to prevent someone else from getting in, Obama better go negative, that will be the day his campaign actually starts.
It is a shame if Barack Obama has to resort to the same tactics that the Republicans run. Barack has already moved too far to the center, caving on issues like FISA and offshore drilling. Granted none of what he stands for will matter if he is defeated by the likes of McCain. Politics in the USA really is a disgrace!
Yes it is time to tAke the gloves off Obama needs to hit hard with negative ads because Mccain is trying to swift boat Obama so Obama needs to counter these negative ads going negative works in this Country Obama needs to Hit hard and swift
no.i m voting for him because he's positive.if i wanted a negative candidate i'd have voted for clinton or mccain.they are experts at negative.if that's the kind of politician's people like ,then,they'll get the same old politician's we've had for years.if people don't want something new,then that's there right and i don't condemn them for it.i DO condemn them for complaining about inept government leaders and then continuing to vote for them.that's just inexcusable.
Jack No, I don’t think so. Most Americans are smarter than the GOP. As times goes on, the public will remember that McCain and Bush are “D” students and will always remain a “D” student.. We need a leader that can think and not just criticize
Jack,
I don't know why everyone gets all bent out of shape over negative adds and comments. As long as what's being said is true, then what's wrong with it? But I don't think Obama can go negative, though, because he has built his campaign on not going with the "same old politics", as he likes to say. So I think he has screwed himself out of using an effective campaign tactic. Fine with me, it keeps him out of the white house.
Jack,
I am not a Hillary supporter. But I think he should choose her as his running mate and turn her loose on John McCain. Furthermore, the Republicans have it right. The congress should come back from vacation and start attacking McCain.
Release The Hounds.
Joe
Ohio
Of course Obama shouldn't go negative! He pledged to run a positive campaign, and should stick by his word.
Then again, he also promised to accept public financing in the general election...
No. He should not stoop to this not so ready for prime time candidate who reads mostly everything he says written by someone else.
However, I don't think he should sit back and take it either. There is a way to counter the offense with a good defense.
Obama should not go negative – why stoop to McCain's level? What should happen is that the American people should wise up – after the last eight years and two elections of smear tactics, we ought to know better by now.
He should make a 3am phone call to Hillary 😉
Lee
PEI Canada
No, No, No. Negative doesn't look good on Obama. I support him 100%, but when or if he go negative, it makes him look bad.
He shouldn't stoop low as McCain and his campaign. But he should come back with an answer everytime they dish something out. Stay on top of every situation and start speaking out by showing up all of McCain's lies, blunders, flip-flops, half-truths and accusations.
Lesa, Jackson TN
Both campaigns have already gone negative which outs the lie to all their promises on both sides to stick to the issues and avoid negative campaigning,
Jack,
Unfortunately he is going to have to go negative. Mainly because there are more ignorant Americans who don't keep up with current events than those who do. That's how Bush got elected the second time.
I'm afraid so, because being passive in 2000 and 2004 got us two terms of Bush. I would love to see an ad that starts with Bush's face and then morphs into McCain's.
Where have you been? He's BEEN negative.
And he's inspired change all right...
If he doesn't pick Hilary, I'm CHANGING my vote to republican for the first time in my life.
Jack, As long as the GOP can convince the majority of the people that “the sky is falling, the sky is falling,” and only the guy who is representative and part of the same folks who lied this country into war and drove her to her economic knees, and caused her to lose face all over the globe can save them, he is not left with much choice. Particularly since these folks can’t seem to lift their heads out of the sand long enough to honestly answer the question of who dynamited the sky in the first place, Obama has to try and meet them – well –at the only level they persist in residing in. He just has to do it with hammering them over the head with the truth.
Do whatever it takes Obama.........save us from another Bush term!
Jack,
Absolutely not, but he must fight the smears with truth, ignorance with intelligent discourse and common sense. Believe it or not there are still some educated and informed Americans who does not need the media to think for them.
I certainly hope Sen. Obama stays positive and continues to direct his campaign to run in a respectfull way. McCain only knows how to tear someone down to build himself up but this time i do not think it will work for i am sure Americia is tired of the old disrespectful politics and the same old politicans, doing the same old things. Time for a complete change Americia.
jack ,i think sen.obama should go negative,hasn't mccain done so.mc cain has had a checkered career and it should be brought to the attention of the american people
No. Negative is a republican tactic. Obama is for change. That's why Clinton won the first time. He didn't stoop to Bush's level and whine about his opponent's flaws and faults.
Yes, but there's a difference between negative attacks, and negative lies. McCain has been defining Obama with falsehoods. Obama needs to attack McCain with the truth. First off should be McCain's blatant lie to balance the budget. His economic policy plan provides numerous ways to cut taxes and increase spending. 2nd off is McCain's claims of Country First. If that's true why does he fill his staff with lobbyists for OTHER COUNTRIES?
he has been going negative for weeks ... he's just "slick" about it ... like a snake.
Senator Obama should stay true to himself. If he goes negative and I hope he won't, the Republican's will spin it to their advantage. They have developed a talent for spinning.
What does it say about the voters that negative campaigning is so much more effective than speaking about the issues and problems that we face? Are we unable to process more than a few syllables?
He has to, but it's going to be tricky. You can't go negative on a war hero. Unless, of course, is name is Kerry or McGovern. I guess only Republicans can get away with it, because only they love the troops.
Why is this question even being asked? Obama went negative months ago in response to McCain's negative attacks. And that's exactly what McCain wanted to happen. Forcing Obama to go negative is why McCain went negative in the first place. McCain is a far more experienced campaigner than Obama, and it's starting to show.
If Obama goes negative, it goes against his very premise of being a different politician. His recent flip-flops on main issues show that he really isn't a different politician but is great at marketing himself. So, he should go negative and define it as "refining" his position on the issue that underlies his campaign.
It just doesn't matter much anymore.
The Republic's mandate is just about dried up. The people deserver a right to functional democracy. If the government and military cannot provide this to us, then we need to start over.
Yes Obama should go negative and also reclaim the stage. I'm voting for him but haven't been impressed with his lack of forcefulness since he left on vacation. He needs to turn up the volume.
This is his election to lose!
It doesnt matter if Obama goes negative or not. At least if he does go negative it would be his own words and not a speech that someone else wrote out for him to read and say.
Unfortunately, Jack, either Obama, or his yet to be announced running mate must go negative on McCain. Someone has got to call this guy to task on some of the idiotic statements he keeps making. I will admit that early on, during the Republican debates, McCain had some things to say that I thought really made some sense. But more and more, when I hear him speak now, I find myself asking, "what the hell is he talking about?"
He needs to have an add of McCain throwing babies into a volcano. That should resonate well with voters.
No...it is what keeps him head and shoulders above McCain. McCain will start tripping over his own tongue pretty soon. You don't build yourself up by putting somebody else down...
No, Barack Obama doesn't have to go negative. He should just pick BILL CLINTON as his VEEP. Bill would have no trouble pointing out McCain's and the other Republicans shortcomings!!!
I think everyone on this forum talking about Obama staying positive think that loosing the election is a good idea. Perhaps my definition of all of this is differenet than yours but after 8 years of Republican occupation I want Obama to take his "change hat" off and convince the American public that McCain is the worst human being in the world that isn't worthy of you telling him the time of day. Why? That's what they will do to Obama. Americans don't understand reason, or politness, are a rational argument. They understand reality tv, simplemindedness, and division. If Obama truly wants to help this country he will realize this and give in to going negative for the good of the country. Hell, that's the reasoning the Repulicans use!
No. If he keeps defining his message and plans for change SPECIFICALLY, I believe the fact he won't engage in school yard bluster will pay off.......you can be tough but not negative or derogatory. How so many can't see through McCain's one-liners to see the vacuum behind it is beyond me. Oh, yeah, they all voted Bush in 2000 and 2004.
He should go negative if he wants to win. He can be a new type of president but to get there he needs to remember he’s a politician. If he doesn’t go negative he will lose and we will have to pay the consequences for the next 4 years.
Jack,
It is time for the 527's to take over as soon as we can rid the party of the Clinton's after the convention.
Jack-
Obama needs to go negative and he needs to add Hillary Clinton to the ticket. Hillary knows how to hit back, Obama has yet to learn. Obama needs to go negative, but moreover, he needs to enlist the Clintons.
No, Obama should not resort to the whine, slime, and lies of the McCain camp. That's typical Republican gutter low road. And he shouldn't defend himself against McCain's hollow accusations. He should come back with pointed, intelligent, critique that exposes McCain's lies, inconsistencies, and his awful record on economics and foreign policies. McCain's connection to Bush is real. Show it and play it, over and over. He should undercut the weak, shaky foundation of his platform. Hit him on the issues Americans care about most and McCain won't stand a chance.
Obama should go negative, but tell the truth.
There is enough questionable conduct in McCain's background – "Keating Five" ring any bells? – to do both.
Jack:
I am a black man from Chicago. I believe Obama can ensure that the dirt on McCain gets out without his fingerprint. I still believe that the first black person to win the nomination in a major party has to tread lightly and make the most use of "friends". I believe that the first Black just as the first Catholic and other firsts have to campaign more carefully. I also believe that the second and following black candidates will be treated much more normally.
Bill
Obama should keep doing what he's doing...winning.
McCain's negative campaign isn't going to win this election. We want something new. Something different. Some change.
In short, we want Obama.
What would be different if he "went negative?" Every ad I see on TV and every speech I see Obama give are full of attacks on Mccain
If Obama is telling the truth about his opponent he should attack back!! Going negative and lying is a problem to me. If he picks Biden, Obama will not have to attack because Biden will!! Obama may have to do some Chi politics if Mccain keep tripping!!
Absolutely. He's left with no choice. Referencing your article from yesterday McCain has nothing to say other than the same old, tired, scripted answers. Unfortunately, voters don't care about the issues. They are like lemmings and it seems that they believe any kind of rhetoric that they hear and the negative stuff really seems to stick. You only have to look back at how the GOP won the last TWO elections on negative, attack-style ads. If Democrats are to regain the White House they will have to do it ugly. It's unfortunate but true.
I don't buy the accuracy of the polls. They're certainly not calling cell phones. Cell phones are the predominant method of communication of everyone under 30 years old. Similarly, I'm 50, I use a cell phone primarily and have caller ID on my landline – and if I don't remotely recognize the number, I don't answer. And I know a lot of people who do the same thing. It is my opinion that polls are being compiled by the same folks who just graduated from flipping your burgers, and aren't worth the paper they're written on.
All Obama needs to do is tell the truth about McCain and his position, which has a negative life of its own.
I would rather see Obama lose then stoop to the republicans dirty tactics. If we Americans fall for this again, then we deserve what Mcsame will do to us.
No. I hope he chooses the high road and continues the march for change beginning with campaign strategies. I lose respect for Senator McCain when I've been subjected to negative, shallow ad's and I will apply that to Obama if he starts the "Rovian" agenda.
Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
Absolutely. Obama can't win if he doesn't smear McBush. Unfortunately, Americans are generally too stupid to understand anything beyond juvenile insults. I'm afraid it might be too late anyway.
If by going negative, one means using false smear campaign tactics of the Rove/Swiftboat variety, absolutely not. However, if by going negative, one means being tough on one's opponent in a truthful way, pointing out McCain's misjudgments and opportunistic changes in position (think off-shore drillilng), then absolutely yes.
Obama needs to on the offensive, instead of playing defense. Take, for example, the abortion issue. Instead of defending his position, he should challenge McCain on whether he would like to take women back to the age of the wire coathanger and back alley abortion. He should ask McCain if he remembers the days when women died from botched septic abortions and if that is what he wants for women again.
The most important thing for Obama now is to find a balance between shedding a negative light on McCain and advocating his own policies as being superior to McCain's. Unfortunately, many Americans are easily persuaded by negative attack ads, and Obama needs to play this game if he intends on winning their votes, and thus, the swing states. At the same time, his "positive" campaign has gotten him to his current position, and he needs to continue it in order to maintain loyalty amongst the voters who brought him from being the underdog, to the democratic nominee. This may be done most effectively by continuing to associate McCain with Bush, while bolstering himself accordingly.
He could go "good cop, bad cop" with his VP. That way he could keep his high standards and morals. He needs to pick an agressive guard dog for a veep. And who does these stupid polls anyway? Maybe CNN should do a special investigation on the polls and polsters. Do they poll anyone under 50 yrs of age, any minorities, any women, any midwesterners or any whatever? I don't put much stock in them and they may change drastically after the VPs are known.
whatever happens is going to happen ... if either of these guys (obama or mccain) wins ... america is still going to pay more for gas prices, jobs are going to continue to be outsourced, and we're going to absorb more illegal immigrants than ever before.
No, Obama should not get negative about McCain. McCain is doing that himself by showing his true colors. If Obama is serious about change, and I think that he is, he should continue his clean campaign. Now that's a refreshing change from politics as usual!
Lisa in Louisiana
No. If Sen. Obama loses the election it will be because the American people reacted favorably to negativity, a la John McCain. If we did not learn our lesson the first time in 2004 then we as a nation are stuck with what negativity brings for us.
Yes. I don't understand why politics is always so staid in this country. If our prospective leaders can't engage in even a verbal fencing match in a campaign, how can we be assured that they'll have the guts and courage to defend us as a country in times of trouble? I want to see some backbone, please.
I fully support Obama. But he needs to quit playing games and announce his VP choice.
Perhaps the American people are actually smart enough to understand the issues and vote on those. Maybe it's Obama's stance on the issues that are driving the polls to change. His stance on foreign policy, taxes, and energy are why he will lose... no matter how hard Jack tries to convince us otherwise. McCain is not a great choice but he beats the alternative...
well, to a point. i feel that there is definitely room for a more "aggressive" stance in regards to McCain, but there has to be a cutoff point. taking it too far, in comparison to lets say the Hilton/Spears advertisements, just puts egg on their face. im sure that those types of attacks not only take it too far, but even makes their own supporters take a step back for a second. i say Senator Obama needs to keep the high road he has taken, but start adding in some "clean jabs" when the opportunity arises. yes, this is politics and not a slander contest, but it is still a fight to the finish
Jack,
If he doesn't go negative, then he will look clueless as to what is going on around him, which is exactly what the Republicans are trying to make him look. To me, he is not really going negative, he is just responding to the issues that McCain is trying to fool the American people with–the same way that George Bush fooled the people in both elections. Guess you could say the Republicans are really snake oil salesmen–all they want is your vote, and, then sit back and watch the United States crumble down as they make their profits off of the wars, and oil. As Barack Obama has said - we are supposed to be The United States–not the divided states!
JACK, i think he should because when you are in a ship and the wind changes direction, you should do everything to handle it.
He hasnt already? He was pretty negative when he was against Hillary.
He should attack McCain on policy, but not on character–though he certainly has enough material . Obama represents a different kind of politics and I hope we Americans are smart enough to appreciate that.
Absolutely not! The polls are shifting because McCain is flirting with a centrist VP. Obama needs to bring Independents like myself into the fold and going negative will not work. We really do want a new kind of politics and are ready to vote accordingly. Announce a knock-em-dead VP choice, have an upbeat convention and the polls will shift, just like the wind over the midwest prairies.....
No. He should drop out, get some experience and try again in 8 or 12 years.
I don't think he has to go negative...but he has to clearly and decisively point out how badly Republican thinking has deminished out country, economically, environmentally, militarily, morally, and imagewise around the world. The facts will speak for themselves. The Republican impact upon our country has provided enough negativity on its own.
Wallace Wolff
Unfortunately, American voters respond more strongly to negative ads than positive ones. At the end of the day, we prove, time and time again, that we are a terrified and reactionary people.
Give me a break Jack. Obama is already going negative. Have you not been paying attention to the news? He continually attacks John McCain and did while he was still running against Clinton. The only problem for Obama is that what he is trying is not working. I think he should go back to IL.
Since when is pointing out the obvious – Obama's total lack of experience and his media proclaimed "rock star" status – a negative?
Can the media please begin being objective and stop projecting their own interpretations or preferences on what anyone says? Report the news, don't make it!
No, he shouldn't. That would be coming down to their level, and if he does that, he sacrifices his biggest advantage.
Tempe, AZ
First of all, polls are often times a 'convenience sample' and are not a good representation of things as a whole. Unless done correctly they can have many biases. So typcially, polls don't mean squat.
That said, as much as I can't stand negative ads they do tend to work. It really is sad that so many people can be swayed by negative ads which are usually geared towards exploiting an individuals fears. The Republican party is excedingly good at this.
Obama probably should start negative ads. Although, if he did I wouldn't be surprised one bit if McCain started running negative ads attacking Obama's negative ads.
I think he should just GO.
No, Jack, stay on message... Let the 527/DNC do the dirty work or Biden is he is VP choice!!
This temp lull is a good thing people will come to the table for a close race or the under dog.
Polls are just snapshots that can not use cellphone numbers and the commuters are on the way home at polling time...5/7 pm!
So, we have seniors and stay at home parents- with a few of the underemployed thrown in... Not a good sample to draw from...
Obama is done. It is finally getting out there that he does not have the experience or ability to do the job, it is over his pay grade. . .
If he can't win now with the media behind him and the mess the Republicans have made then going negative won't help him.
This is what happens when you run on nothing but hope and change. . . He never had a real plan and now it has caught up to him.
Hillary would be crushing McCain at this point. . .
He doesn't need to go negative, but he definitely needs to go on a very forceful offensive and stop responding to McCain's attacks. He needs to be more firm and commanding with his message like he was in the preliminaries. He seems to have lost his spark and is being weighed down by the attacks.
Jack,
Obama has already gone negative. He has been running negative commercials in Florida for a while. His commericial that features "Economics", the supposed economic playbook from Sen. McCain, has been running in Florida for weeks, if not months. The simple matter is that Obama's ads, though they run 10x more often than McCain's, do not resonate and are not effective.
I am disgusted with the average voter. They complain about campaigns getting too negative and then turn around and go for the negative ads. I thought McCain promised a more positive race also. I had hopes that this race would be on the issues. McCain set the tone and so we will hve to endure the consequences. I am praying Obama wins and is able to show that we can be positive in office and be successful. This is the most important Presidential race in recent history. "Obama is my hope." McCain is not the man I thought he was in 2000.
Margaret
Boise. Idaho
He did not go negative with Hill and look where he is so no I don't think he needs to go negative. The debatesare what will matter. I think folks who have not made up their minds will after the debates.
Let's see who shines then.
And, it only takes 1 point to win; so if the polls are showing him 1 point ahead, isn't he still winning?
If Obama stays on target, but takes a harder stance on pointing out McCain's considerable shortcomings, he can still pull it off. He will have to put out stronger messages and respond directly and immediately to GOP attacks. He will have to quit the "um's" and "you know's" and be more clear and decisive in his speech. The bottom line is this country is hungry for change and Obama has to convince those on the fence that he can bring it about. McCain's record is not great, so sticking to the message, attacking McCain's record, bringing attention to his gaffes and the fact that he is so out of touch could definitely bring Obama's numbers back up.
No, I dont think he should stoop to the level of John McCain, but he should get across to the American voters what a vote for John McCain means.
Because no matter how you look at it and who you will support or will not support, a vote for John McCain means:
1. A new war with Iran (or even Russia) along with two in Iraq and Afghanistan.
2. No answer to the enegy crisis and more dependance on foreign oil.
3. The same situation we are in now 4yrs down the road.
Wake up people!!!
meet the new bush
same as the old bush
Jack,
It's so hard to say now. Deep down I think Obama should hit as hard as he could ever in his life, draw blood from McCain, but if the polls are correct, many Americans don't want change, and definitely not a black president...they want us to keep on the path we're on...economy going down the tubes, jobs non-existent, housing market in a shambles, public education a disgrace...budding wars all over the globe, all this because Hillary lost?, and all this talk about experience. Hell, George Washington didn't have any experience, big bad Bill Clinton didn't have any experience...I don't want to lose faith in the promise of change for America, but as my mom used to say, hard heads make sore behinds.
Diane, NY
I feel that pointing out unpopular flaws, such as McCain saying the middle east will accept us as liberators, is not so much getting negative as using the apparent flaws to better support his campaign. Plus, I feel that this is good for Obama's outward personality, showing that he is not afraid to go toe-to-toe with the opposition and say the things that people might not want to hear but need to.
Obviously yes. Americans say they hate negative ads, but every election is won by the party (and the Republicans are masters at the "scare them" technique) that gets out the best negative ads....no exceptions.
Jack, it's time Obama shows his tough side. I believe up until Georgia and the forum on saturday, Obama did have the advantage showing the brighter side of American politics. Now however, with his lead nearly vanished, Obama has to bring out all the flaws of McCain's campaign. But he has to assure that it isn't directly insulting McCain's character, so his campaign still holds it's "new politics" appeal. And he needs to show these flaws in ads that are emotionly powerful and in a heart-swaying way. Inspiring people is one of Obama's greatest advantages.
He needs to stay positive – it keeps him "above" the others and that's where he needs to be – not stooping to their level. He has others who can do the negative and unfortunately, it will have to happen because as statistics have proven, negative works. Obama must stay "different" than everyone else; he must continue the offer of change and hope for America versus the same old politics of the past.
Negative but strictly truthful.....that should do the trick.
Jack,
It depends on what you mean by going negative. If stating McCain's position clearly and demonstrating his close alignment to the failed Bush administration's policies on Iraq, the economy, and social issues is going negative then by all means he should. If going negative means attacking McCain on personal issues then he should stay above the fray.
David Dimenstein
Worcester, Massachusetts
Uncle Grumpy...in light of everything you still amaze me. Watch your networks program tonight on Obama. This is no kid glove candidate. Listen to your candidate speak, he is just as critical and negative as any GOP ad on the airwaves. Talk more about issues that raise you blood pressure...like this "do even less Congress". But no you want to pin everything on your "kool aid" drinking euporia and blindly follow the "light".
I thought you would never asked this question, Jack. Shortly after winning the primaries, Senator Obama in reference to the GOP said " if they come to the campaign with a knife, we will respond with a gun". The question is – Where is the gun? Senator Obama should be made to understand there is a difference between campaigning for an election and running a government. You first campaign and win the election and then you can run a government. Not the other way round. Apparently, the GOP seems to understands this better than the Democrats. The question to Senator Obama once again is – Where is the gun?
Well the republicans can only win by doing this.because if they ran on issues alone they couldn`t win. Barack should go negative to save his ass.
The same type of people who believe the negative ads and the garbage spreading across the internet gave us what we have now. I’m afraid he does need to go negative if he wants to win.
Negative is what a lot of people are brainwashed by. How else could George W. Bush have been elected for a second term?