I'd really like to hear from anyone who'd like to weigh in regardless of who you support for President but I'm really not asking who you support or why; what I AM asking is if you've been swayed in this election or in the past by negative ads or other forms of "mudslinging" and dirty politics. From what I've heard and read most people surveyed will claim they don't LIKE negative campaigning yet this is still said to be effective. Apparently people are paying attention even if they claim they dislike it.
What about you? Is your choice of for whom to vote influenced by negative ads and other forms of negative campaigning or do you base you choice on things like the candidates' records and their views on the issues that matter to you most? Remember, I'm not asking for you to repeat any of the "dirt" on either candidate here, we've probably all seen and heard enough of them by now, but I'm interested in whether you listen to the mudslinging and if you think it has a big effect on others' choices.
Annie
[question posted by anniepa]responses and comments:
Negative ads don't work for me (or on me). I never pay them any attention except for the fact that some of them are so darned ridiculous. From the time I find out who is running, I research them. I don't care if they are having an affair, have a "love child," have never gone to church or belong to 7 churches. None of that matters to me. That is their personal life. I am not voting for them based on their personal peccadillos. I just want to know what their plans are (whether it is local, state or federal). I want to know how they aim to accomplish their goals and plans. And that is about it. People who are not really interested in politics, in the everyday running of their government, are more likely to be swayed by negative ads. That's my opinion, anyway. Sadly, some of those people do vote. [CherylsPearls]
Short, sweet, and to the point: People say they prefer positive ads (and there's no reason to think they're not being honest about that), but studies show that negative ads 'stick' better in their minds, whether they realize it or not. [ClarusVisum]
Honestly I try not to pay attention to the commercials, but sometimes when I see them I laugh to myself...even some of the speeches where they criticize the other opponent...Like as short example one candidate who only has four years of political office experience criticizing how someone who has been in politics for 20 plus years has changed their views....when during their four year (much shorter span obviously) has changed their views....To me this is a negative to the one who is stating this. ANd for the other side comparing the other opponent as a "star" personality....well, both are true...except why is this so influential? Because they as well as WE know it is the same reasoning why when we stand in the supermarket checkout we may not buy the rags on the rack about celebrities secret lives, we will peek into those pages. I try my best to listen to what each person does over the course of their time, the choices they make, and the consistency they have. As a human being I cannot help but take into consideration their personal choices in thier lives, but I go more for experience over hyped talk. I hope I didn't breach your repeating mudslinging like a 50's children story, I just wanted to use examples. Nice topic and hopefully it won't turn into one of "those" that you normally see when people want to discuss how we choose who to vote for. Have a great day. [taface412]
I would listen to a message better if the candidate was discussiong his/her positive points rather than putting down the opposition. It's no different than the 12 year old bully on the playground. Nine times out of ten, they have low self esteem and don't feel they are good in any way...so they put others down in an effort to make themselves seem better. Adults who desire to lead our country should behave in a more mature manner. Unfortunately it's human nature to crave propaganda type advertising. We want to hear dirt no matter how ridiculous it may be. Look how many millions of dollars are spent on so called Entertainment magazines that take pride in speculation and down right exagerations. I personally don't feel swayed when one candidate attacks another. I prefer to see what each candidate has said about themselves and how they present themselves. I do think many others are swayed though...how big of an effect, I don't know. I just see in my own home, where I'm am alone in my opinions, every bad thing one candidate says about the other eventually makes it into my inbox with sensational headlines that make it sound as if my candidate is hell-bent on destroying our country, our very way of life, and quite possibly the entire world. [foxyfire33]
"It's no different than the 12 year old bully on the playground. Nine times out of ten, they have low self esteem and don't feel they are good in any way...so they put others down in an effort to make themselves seem better. Adults who desire to lead our country should behave in a more mature manner." Excellent point! They certainly should behave in a more mature manner but they rarely do. Annie [anniepa]
I am never swayed by negative ads. I refuse to watch them outright. I have not watched a single negative ad throughout this campaign and anytime I see a political ad coming on the television I change the channel. I have watched Paris Hilton's ad, but that doesn't count. [Taskr36]
Paris Hilton's ad is the only decent one I've seen. Unfortunately, that is not a joke, I'm totally serious and all the candidates should follow her example. State a position on a key issue without attacking someone else, inject a bit of humor even if it's self-deprecating and look "hot" and optimistic throughout. Annie [anniepa]
I know it doesn't work on me, simply because I'm 57 and know better. I do wonder about newer voters -- although most younger people seem more savvy these days. I think there's a general backlash from those type of ads these days. People are just sick of it. [MoonlightSerenade]
I sure hope you're right about people being sick of it. I know I am! I'm 55 so I know better too and it seems like I've seen it all. Annie [anniepa]
I hate mudslinging and try to avoid it. I prefer ads which talk about policy differences, more than those that talk about who is the bigger celebrity. [danrunsfast614]
I really have to agree with response number four. When those ads come on and I'm to far from the remote and can't get to it in time to shut it off, I really feel like I am watching my child's response after a fight with their sibling. Although I this I have to flip flop lol, because I may admire what Kerry and Obama, I really don't think the playing nice thing works. American people really like dirt and they love playing dirty, if they didn't talk shows would not have such high ratings. [ZephyrSun]
How true, talk shows and stupid reality shows like The Bachelor, none of which I watch. Annie [anniepa]
In a word, helll, yeh. Why else would they still be in use campaign after campaign? Most people who run and manage a campaign aren't dumb. If they are creating negative ads, it's because they did the research and saw that it does work. Even if it si not something that we personaly respond to, there is a large majority that it does work on. Negative campiagns are used because they can be an effective, albight less than honorable, method of getting the job done. [xfahctor]
I agree 100%...Johnson and Nixon were among the best negative campaigners in the business, they won a lot of elections at a lot of levels. The Rovian method has had its successes. Negative ads don't have to be false, though some have only the smallest morsel of truth in them. They can be devastatingly effective on the uninformed or underinformed voter. I don't mind a sharp, well-written negative ad that makes a valid accusation or attacks a stance or statement. I just hate the lies and dumb sh*t. The good negative ads can get me thinking...the crap ones just polarize me more. [calcynic]
Denial and defense are the most predictable of human responses. And believe it or not it will catch your attention even more then something you are just used to seeing every day. The negative ads has always been present, even at the times you weren't aware of it. Check the subliminal advertising and you will find your answer to this very interesting debate. [neuronic]
Sometimes it will work depending on what the negative ad says. For example if a candidate were to reveal to have a sexual attraction toward children then the opponent can easily paint the candidate as a child molester even if the candidate never do such things. Other times it can fail. It all depends on the viewers' perception. [spiderlizard22]
Truthfully negative ads turn both my wife and I off, it doesn't matter who they are for or who they are against, the more negative the person is the less likely I am to vote for the person being negative, the negative ads, I believe take away from the real issues of the election. I would love to see a clean honest election platform without all the negativity. DM [damucci]
That makes two of us! Please, tell me what you're going to do, want to do or have done! Annie [anniepa]
Well to dig on it, advertisement whether good or bad have effect on everyone and that includes me. Gossip (which is a 'big' part of advertisement whether you like it or not), amuses me and somehow gives my thought a tickle. Negative advertisement to me serves as a pondering thought to exercise my balance of what I know of these people in politics. But that's beside the point of whether I have to believe if its true or not. That's a different story. So, I believe it has EFFECT but it wont be big enough to AFFECT my choice in politics. I'm sure the rest also have the same notion. [SummerChick]
I think negative ads could probably be counter productive among voters who are enlightened and are equipped to see through the negative ads. By and large, by the time I choose to vote John McCaine, any negative ad against him will only increase on my resolve to Support him more and more! [academic2]
I am sorry to say this but yes, I do think that negative ads work. If someone is in a negative state of mind then this will definitely work. I will be the first one to admit that I am nosy and I love a little gossip now and then. I dont pass it on, nor do I look for it. However, In a person who is in the public eye, I think a little mudslinging brings them down to a human, more relatable level. I dont necessarily think its right. I think its something that isnt going to go away. I makes me want to live my life in a good way. If you dont want to be talked about, dont do anything to make them talk. I think that we are human and sometimes it helps to see that others have issues too. I dont think people should prosper from someones dirt or misfortune. That is not a way to make money or to live. dl [dloveli]
The negative ads have no effect on me, except to lose respect for the one who is doing the negative campaigning. I won't change my vote because the opposing candidate says something negative about my preferred candidate. We had a really bad negative campaign here in my area a couple of years back on a local level and it was mean, nasty, and very ugly. I wound up disliking both candidates. Apparently it worked because the challenger to the incumbent won the local election. But everyone I talked to said they didn't like it. I can't figure it out. Maybe people secretly like it but won't admit it. [thelastwolf113]
I go by the candidate's record, but if the stations or the media are more in favor of one candidate, then I will look at the negative ads and also look for another view rather than the positive uplifting one so presented. So if I see so many we love Obama ad or proclamations, I get suspicious because nobody is that good or else he is campaigning to replace God. I base my decision on the candidate's views, and his moral standard and if he will do what he promises or if he is saying that just to be elected. Oh and some believe the negative ads against Democrats and some believe them against Republicans and will base their vote in that. [suspenseful]
Mudslinging is the most misleading form of publicity there is. Its too likely to be untrue or based on rumour or pure lies. People who are swayed by this are those likely to be led by lies in the first place. Its best to ignore this type of publicity. [Bluepatch]
As far as I am concerned they are a complete turn off, I don't want to know the the dirt about the other people I want to know what you will do for me and the country, In our local elections this year we have one person who started makeing negative remarks about the people in the other party before he even knew who he'd be running against. I I know the the things he said were workeded over by the spin doctor before he said them, in other words only half truths. I'd find someone to write in before I'd vote for him. That's how I feel [savypat]
Im going to be voting for the first time this year since I just turned 18 and these ads are very annoying and it would be nice to know wheter the politicians are telling the truth or not. [newar18]
That's exactly why I've never paid attention to the ads from either side other than to discuss them in a forum such as myLot. There are TV news shows that analyze and do fact checks on the various ads and tell viewers what's true, what's false and what's somewhere in between. That's the biggest problem, there are so many ads that aren't total fabrications but they're just misleading enough to hopefully (for the campaign who runs them), well, to mislead you. I'm glad to read that someone like you, who is just 18 and plans to vote for the first time, is interested in knowing the truth which means you already have enough cynicism in you to LOOK for the truth. I think that in this day and age with the internet available to almost everyone and with the 24/7 cable news outlets, there's really no excuse for anyone not knowing where each candidate stands on each important issue. Annie [anniepa]
To me, negative ads are a form a of cheap comic releif. Neither Obama or McCain are as terrible as the Neg ads make them out to be. Honestly I dont see why we can have the elections right now and skip over this messy business of dirty campaingning. Its an embarassment. We dont realize that the entire world watches our elections every year, and laughs at us. I mean, who dosent know who they will be voting for? Honestly I'm just glad we are getting rid of Bush. Donny Osmand could become the next president for all I care - just get that moron off the hill!! [II2aTee]
There have been times that my attention to the negative political ads have swayed my opinion. I really do try to be as objective as I can and I don't really like mudslinging as a rule. I try to make my decision based on what I know at the time and commercials have a habit of influencing people. I guess that you just can't stop the negative advertisements and dog grooming remarks. rolleyes [bamakelly]
My dear Anniepa, people tends to scoff in the public were mudslinging is concerned but when they are in their private zone they love it. I am a whole love politics especially when it comes to election because there are always alot of jokes that is being spurn. I think that person who are involve especially the voters should never take it serious. There are alot of person who are dead hearted demorcatic or republicans so even if there are mudslinging they will be still voting for his/her party. Now the undecided they are the ones who will lick out about the mudslinging because they really don't understand politics that much and seeing that they don't belong to a particular party then they will take some of it as negative instead of just looking at the fundamental of the party. So in all I love to listen and enjoy reading the cartoons. They are fun to me. [kerriannc]
I'm afraid negative adds do work, even though I wish that were not so. They don't work on me as I look at the candidate's policies and also assess whether that candidate is talking straight or whether they are full of the usual BS. Unfortunately, I suspect that most voters don't examine policies carefully and they go on impression (ie can I identify with that candidate). If the negative adds makes them feel leery of a particular candidate, then whatever that candidate's policies, they are unlikely to then vote for him/her [evanslf]
Frankly, I doubt it. What tends to happen is that those who favor the candidate who did the bashing, will see the ad as accurate, or else forgive their candidate for being a mud-slinging jerk. Those who are aligned with the candidate MALIGNED, will see the ad as more proof that the candidate behind the ad is not fit for the office s/he seeks. We tend to become more staunch as the battle wears on. Until we just get damned sick of the whole thing. And even when that occurs, we still vote for who we had intended to almost immediately after (and sometimes before!) learning about "their" candidate. And when I see a negative ad put out by the candidate I'm supporting, more often than not I wanna give him a dope slap and say "hey! don't stoop to his/her level!!". It really makes me nervous. 'Cause I know that it'll only harden the resolve of those who have decided already - and that is most of us. Do negative ads work? I don't think so. Do they ruffle feathers? Yes. Do they have an impact? Yep. Unfortunately, I don't see EITHER side benefitting. [stanwshura]
I think that negative ads, mudslinging, and digging up dirt on each other is very very childish, immature, rude, and obnoxious, and they seem to have reverted to nasty children - which is why I despise politics. Poli/tics - many blood sucking creatures? LOL! I tend to avoid ANYTHING political, including but not limited to those annoying ads, debates, news that digs up dirt on them, etc. I don't want to hear it, I don't think anybody should hear it, and I cannot believe it would really sway people. ALL of the candidates do it, so none of them can stand there without dirty hands and rock merchandise. They also all take donations or money from special interest groups, so none of them can claim they don't. This means they have to press a certain agenda or get a certain word out to make that group happy. This is not entertainment to me, it is not even interesting. I do know that a large percentage of people are interested in politics, so this is not a slam, but you MUST admit that it is not entertaining - unless you like to see middle aged or older people try to duke it out with words improvised by speech writers. Bleh. I also have to wonder how much they really believe in what they say. I guess it probably does have an affect on other people but I don't know why, and I really think people ought to think about this clearly before they allow ANY advertising to affect them. There is an ulterior motive to any advertising, no matter how small, and we would all be wise to try and remain neutral to it unless it is something that you really like or care about. Remove curiosity, popularity, etc and judge it for yourself. Don't be swayed, that is the point of the advertising. [mommyboo]