Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).

Sunday, July 16, 2006


Joe Rips Another Page From Rove '04 Handbook

Sen. Lieberman (Lieberman-CT) has a new negative ad up calling Ned Lamont a "flip-flopper":

CT: Lieberman is up with a new ad that hits Lamont as a "flip-flopper." The ad notes his past support for Republicans, his decision not to release his tax returns and his pledge not to run negative ads. The visuals for the ad are very simple with just a photo of Lamont shifting left and right with the words the announcer saying be typed on screen using a very techy font. Are negative ads what really what Lieberman needs right now? Aren't voters looking for a reason to come back to Lieberman?

Joe really thinks it's two years ago, and he's George W. Bush running against John Kerry.

Update: Here's the ad (w/ YouTube). Spazeboy takes it apart.
Yeah, that'll really make Joe look less Republican. Where did he find these brilliant ad consultants.
So... Lieberman's stratety is to use Karl Rove's tricks to target Democratic voters.

Somebody remind me. Which candidate did Karl Rove work for in 2004? And which candidate won overwhelmingly among Democratic voters?
"There you go again"
- R. Reagan, Dark Ages
- J. Leiberman, recently
Holy Joe is delusional.

He does not seem to realize that voting against filibustering Alito, supporting the filed occupation of Iraq, supporting the right of Catholic hospitals to refuse emergency contraception to rape victims, and voting in favor of the horrendous bankruptcy bill, has turned many, many, Democratic voters against him.

He behaves as if he has a divine right to be reelected.

Well, Joe, I have news for you. This is still a democracy, and when people are pissed off with their representatives, they turn away from them. Suck it up! You made bad choices and they are now coming back to bite you in the ass.
We love to hate Joe... but this looks like a good ad to me: It cements Lamont as a vacillator with past GOP leanings.

In other words: Since the ad shows that Ned has a Republican-loving past, it muddies the differences between Joe and Ned -- and gives swing voters less of a reason to jump on the Lamont wagon.

This is a battle for the most capricious element of the Democratic electorate. Most of us here aren't persuadable; it's the swing voters that matter.
What is with the tax return anyway? Is he saving it until just before the primary so he can take the wind out of Lieberman's sails?
I think Lamont should pledge to release his tax returns if Leiberman's wife will release her financial details-mainly who she lobbies for and how much money they pay her.
Don't be so naive. Almost all Dems use negative ads at one time or another, for one very good reason: They work.

Joe is not acting like a Republican, he is acting like a pretty crafty campaigner. If you guys think that equals "Republican" you better go back to the Green Party and Permanent Loser staus...
Politus- I was referring specifially to the "flip-flopper" charge against Lamont. That, along with the swiftboating of Kerry, was basically Bush's entire campaign in 2004.

I'm not attacking Joe for using negative ads. I'm saying he sounds an awful lot like George W. Bush and Karl Rove. And he does.
Um, Politus? This is a PRIMARY. Beating up on Republicans is great, and also something Lieberman would never do. Tearing down a Democrat who's going to have to go on to face the Republican in the general, after being weakened by negative attacks? Not so much. Running negative ads against other Democrats tends to turn off Democratic voters, even when the candidate who's running the ads is far more appealing than Lieberman--lucky for Joe they're not the ones he's targeting.
Post a Comment

<< Home