It's going to get uglier--ye olde campaign approaches End Days.

[Jumbo]

I've been away for a few days but have kept up and today I think we are turning a bend in the road. Links will come later from others no doubt, but I just heard Palin accused Barack of "pal-ing around with terrorists" (you know who) and put it in a particularly low blow context (can't quote it.)

From now on I think we get into some real ugly, just as TrumanB has been calling for it. The "poor picked on pit bull" may show why she was called Barracuda long before politics. I'm from Alaska and still have longstanding contacts. That all makes me a little biased to one of our tribe making it big (even when Wally Hickel did it) . Actually, adding the negative stuff on Gravel and Stevens, and what few famous Alaskan politcians there are fit right into the DC scene. . And I heard a lot about how corrupt the game was up there back then--on all sides. Lots of "last years freedom fighters are this years tyrants" kind of thing.

I remember reading in the tailgate lots of "the wheels are coming off" and desperation reigns" type posts about the Obajma campaign coming from the right side of the poltical bird, post GOP convention. I think it may be more the case that this is what has been happening to the repubs, beginning soon after the convention afterglow.

But I predict most pretense of "higher road" is going away. I think objective talk about policy and issues will be increasingly jingoistic and seeped in mean-spirited personal attacks and I think distractions from the things not going well will be the order of the day.

I think its going to be a real fight for the big prize. The fur and blood will most likely fly. And not just on here. Hopefully, with all that's at stake, we will end up being who we think we are no matter how it turns out.

Anyone else think it's going to get pretty ugly? Anyone else changing their mind? Anyone else already planning to love their fellow American and fellow tailgater even if they’re on the side that "wins" and you're on the side that "loses?"

[ACW]

Going to GET pretty ugly?

[Burgundy Burner]

It will get a lot uglier in the tailgate too, imo. Sure would be nice to have a politics forum. The tg is meant for like-minded friends, not a place that divides us.

My $0.02.

[ACW]

It will get a lot uglier in the tailgate too, imo. Sure would be nice to have a politics forum. The tg is meant for like-minded friends, not a place that divides us.

My $0.02.

:applause:

[Jumbo]

It will get a lot uglier in the tailgate too, imo. Sure would be nice to have a politics forum. The tg is meant for like-minded friends, not a place that divides us.

My $0.02.

Presentation usually matters to me as much as position, when it comes to maintaining a friendly atmosphere.

If a position is based on some real thought, and presented in some basically reasonable fashion, I can usually maintain some postiive feelings about the exchange with little effort, even in disagreement.

On the other hand, someone can have some similar important views to mine, and by nature of his conduct make me wish he was on someone else's side

[Larry]

Going to GET pretty ugly?

I understand the feeling that things have been ugly all along.

OTOH, do you really think that both sides actually fired everything they had two months ago?

We all know that both sides have been holding whatever they think are their biggest shots for later.

Here's one more thing: The closer we get to the election, the less obligation the campaigns are under to be factual. Face it: If you're gonna smear your opponent with something that you know is false, then you do it a week before the election, so that your opponent won't have time to get the truth out.

(Remember "John McCain's half-black love child"? One day before the voting.)

Meaning: The smears we've seen so far, are the ones that are more factual than the ones that are coming.

(Don't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?)

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Meaning: The smears we've seen so far, are the ones that are more factual than the ones that are coming.

(Don't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?)

:(

[SkinsHokieFan]

It was ugly back in 2002 and 2004 and 2006

Its such an us vs them mentality right now that nobody has objectivity, just pointed personal attacks

[Special K]

Yeah, I saw Palin said that when asked by the press today and I thought to myself "I no, here we go." These campaigns have been getting increasingly ugly over the past 2 months or so, and I have no doubt they will go it in the ugliest of uglist, slimey, pigpen, mudslinging fashion in November.

Personally, I wish Mrs. Palin would not have said that today, I want to hear them talk more about their health plan as that is what Obama is slamming them on in a few key states currently. When someone's slamming you on a policy issue, you don't respond with "well he's friends with terrorists." You respond with something to the effect of "Obama's policy is an extremely expensive policy and we would like to know how he is going to pay for it in this time of economic recession." Something like that. Not bringing up Bill Ayers.

This crap is going to get ooooooogly!

[Larry]

Its such an us vs them mentality right now that nobody has objectivity, just pointed personal attacks

Look how many people on ES (a group which, IMO, tend to usually be above-average people) want "their side" to get uglier.

One of the reasons why politicians lie so much? There's no penalty for it.

Look how many of the lies told in the debate Thursday night, were shown to be wrong on factcheck two months ago. The campaigns come out with a lie, the lie gets exposed, and the campaign keeps using it anyway. Because they know that they won't get called on it. The lie will be aired live on 7 networks, in prime time, nationwide. The fact that it's false will appear on a web page that 95% of the voters haven't even heard of.

(And the few people who actually go to factcheck and find out that it's a lie? Half of them will forgive "their side" for lying because "well, the other side does it, too".)

[techboy]

(And the few people who actually go to factcheck and find out that it's a lie? Half of them will forgive "their side" for lying because "well, the other side does it, too".)

And the other half will forgive "their side" for lying because "well, the other side is worse."

[Monte51Coleman]

Cue the final, desperate, act.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100303738.html?hpid=topnews

McCain Plans Fiercer Strategy Against Obama

By Michael D. Shear

Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, October 4, 2008; A01

Sen. John McCain and his Republican allies are readying a newly aggressive assault on Sen. Barack Obama's character, believing that to win in November they must shift the conversation back to questions about the Democrat's judgment, honesty and personal associations, several top Republicans said.

With just a month to go until Election Day, McCain's team has decided that its emphasis on the senator's biography as a war hero, experienced lawmaker and straight-talking maverick is insufficient to close a growing gap with Obama. The Arizonan's campaign is also eager to move the conversation away from the economy, an issue that strongly favors Obama and has helped him to a lead in many recent polls.

"We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative said, indicating that a fresh batch of television ads is coming. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here," said the operative, who was not authorized to discuss strategy and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Being so aggressive has risks for McCain if it angers swing voters, who often say they are looking for candidates who offer a positive message about what they will do. That could be especially true this year, when frustration with Washington politics is acute and a desire for specifics on how to fix the economy and fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is strong.

Robert Gibbs, a top Obama adviser, dismissed the new McCain strategy. "This isn't 1988," he said. "I don't think the country is going to be distracted by the trivial." He added that Obama will continue to focus on the economy, saying that Americans will remain concerned about the country's economic troubles even as the Wall Street crisis eases somewhat.

Moments after the House of Representatives approved a bailout package for Wall Street on Friday afternoon, the McCain campaign released a television ad that challenges Obama's honesty and asks, "Who is Barack Obama?" The ad alleges that "Senator Obama voted 94 times for higher taxes. Ninety-four times. He's not truthful on taxes." The charge that Obama voted 94 times for higher taxes has been called misleading by independent fact-checkers, who have noted that the majority of those votes were on nonbinding budget resolutions.

A senior campaign official called the ad "just the beginning" of commercials that will "strike the new tone" in the campaign's final days. The official said the "aggressive tone" will center on the question of "whether this guy is ready to be president."

McCain's only positive commercial, called "Original Mavericks," has largely been taken off the air, according to Evan Tracey of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political ads.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's performance at Thursday night's debate embodied the new approach, as she used every opportunity to question Obama's honesty and fitness to serve as president. At one point she said, "Barack Obama voted against funding troops [in Iraq] after promising that he would not do so."

Palin kept up the attack yesterday, saying in an interview on Fox News that Obama is "reckless" and that some of what he has said, "in my world, disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander in chief."

McCain hinted Thursday that a change is imminent, perhaps as soon as next week's debate. Asked at a Colorado town hall, "When are you going to take the gloves off?" the candidate grinned and replied, "How about Tuesday night?"

Yesterday in Pueblo, Colo., McCain made clear that he intends to press Obama on a variety of familiar GOP themes during the debate, as he accused the Democrat once again of getting ready to raise taxes and increase government spending.

"I guarantee you, you're going to learn a lot about who's the liberal and who's the conservative and who wants to raise your taxes and who wants to lower them," McCain said.

A senior aide said the campaign will wait until after Tuesday's debate to decide how and when to release new commercials, adding that McCain and his surrogates will continue to cast Obama as a big spender, a high taxer and someone who talks about working across the aisle but doesn't deliver.

Two other top Republicans said the new ads are likely to hammer the senator from Illinois on his connections to convicted Chicago developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko and former radical William Ayres, whom the McCain campaign regularly calls a domestic terrorist because of his acts of violence against the U.S. government in the 1960s.

The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. appears to be off limits after McCain condemned the North Carolina Republican Party in April for an ad that linked Obama to his former pastor, saying, "Unfortunately, all I can do is, in as visible a way as possible, disassociate myself from that kind of campaigning."

McCain advisers said the new approach is in part a reaction to Obama, whose rhetoric on the stump and in commercials has also become far harsher and more aggressive.

They noted that Obama has run television commercials for months linking McCain to lobbyists and hinting at a lack of personal ethics -- an allegation that particularly rankles McCain, aides said.

Campaigning in Abington, Pa., yesterday, Obama continued to focus on the economy, even as he lashed out at McCain.

"He's now going around saying, 'I'm going to crack down on Wall Street' . . . but the truth is he's been saying 'I'm all for deregulation' for 26 years," Obama said. "He hasn't been getting tough on CEOs. He hasn't been getting tough on Wall Street. . . . Suddenly a crisis comes and the polls change, and suddenly he's out there talking like Jesse Jackson."

Obama highlighted a new report showing a reduction of more than 159,000 jobs last month, and he linked the bad economic news to McCain and Palin.

"Governor Palin said to Joe Biden that our plan to get our economy out of the ditch was somehow a job-killing plan; that's what she said," Obama told a crowd of thousands. "I wonder if she turned on the news this morning. . . . When Senator McCain and his running mate talk about job killing, that's something they know a thing or two about, because the policies they've supported and are supporting are killing jobs in America every single day."

McCain issued a statement yesterday saying the bailout bill "is not perfect, and it is an outrage that it's even necessary. But we must stop the damage to our economy done by corrupt and incompetent practices on Wall Street and in Washington."

Speaking in Pueblo just as the House was finishing deliberations on the package, McCain blamed fellow lawmakers for the failure to adequately regulate the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"It was the Democrats and some Republicans in the Congress who pushed back and did not allow those reforms to take place, and that's a major reason we are in the trouble we are in today," he said. "Those members of Congress ought to be held accountable on November 4th as well."

Before the bailout crisis, aides said, McCain was succeeding in focusing attention on Obama's record and character. Now, they say, he must return to those subjects.

"We are looking for a very aggressive last 30 days," said Greg Strimple, one of McCain's top advisers. "We are looking forward to turning a page on this financial crisis and getting back to discussing Mr. Obama's aggressively liberal record and how he will be too risky for Americans."

[Jumbo]

I think rough and tumble interactions is part of being human, and it's the specifics context and content that determines the merits of actions and reactions.

Few would openly support qualities like "namby-pamby" or "super-sensitive" as desirable. We benefit from breaking a few eggs in order to get omelets on the menu. Harshness and more extreme responses are not only reasonable, but demanded at times. But that's not the cases I refer to when indicting those talking about Palin not properly caring for her child or Obama making pals with terrorists. It’s such nonsense as offered.

When GWB looked into Pupin’s soul, or when our Government openly supported terrorist/dictators in several global regions during the 80's,90s were the same "sides" hatchet men of the day all up in arms over those far more blatant associations? No, because it was thought it met our "goals." Ironically, the left went after them for that--now those examples aren’t quite the same thing, but this is the same old saw of hypocrisy that seems to be our most deep-set political trait, maybe in this forum, maybe in this country.

I find attacks that come from the motive of distraction with little or no regard for essential validity, are simply low-grade human behavior. I think the Art of Rove or the Clintons in using disingenuous political maneuvering (lying, misrepresenting etc etc) is sad even if effective. People often excuse, and even call for, certain ethically or morally questionable activities in politics if a certain goal may be achieved. Well, theft can be effective in reaching a goal, but it's still thievery, and the people are still being thieves.

[Special K]

Well, theft can be effective in reaching a goal, but it's still thievery, and the people are still being thieves.

Agreed, both campaigns have strayed from the notion that they are going to run clean campaigns (McCain morseso with his endorsed ones more than Obama with his actual endorsed ones). It's disheartening to see 2 campaigns so focused on "changing" Washington clearly and quickly digressing right back into the exact back-stabbing, muddslinging, pigpen-groveling campaign tactics the American people HATE! When are they going to get the damn memo that that is NOT want we want to hear about, if we did, we would reconvene at our grade school playground.

I swear to God, I could go out there and run a more clean, high road campaign than this...simply because my friends and I are not corrupted by washington. We know that good strategy when your opponent is talking about health care is to not only NOT bring up health care, but bring up ties with terrorist connections. NOT. That ridiculous. I'd get laughed my ass out of a debate in class this quarter if I tried that. You reply in kind: they talk about health care, you talk about health care and the differences between the 2....non of this other crap about Ayers. Good Lord.

I love Palin, but that is a bad strategical more right there.

[Monte51Coleman]

I love Palin, but that is a bad strategical more right there.

I guess I don't really blame Palin for the comment. I will assume that she was just following orders.

[Special K]

I guess I don't really blame Palin for the comment. I will assume that she was just following orders.

You're in all likelihood right. She was told to go out and hammer on this today. But that just shows the desperation of the campaign IMO. Obama's out there eviscerating McCain's bill and McCain is holed up in his Arizona retreat studying for the debate and Palin is talking about terrorists-connections! I'm incredulous at the number of inept campaign officials the McCain campaign has got working for them. This is absolutely the wrong strategy for Sara to be doing. She needs to be out there pounding away on the McCain/Palin ticket regarding health care...I'm sure she knows something about it while studying for the debate. Get up there and have a response for was Obama is saying about a MAJOR issue in the minds of Americans. :ahhhhh:AAHHHH!! I need a valium

[Monte51Coleman]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html

ENGLEWOOD, Colorado (CNN) -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on Saturday slammed Sen. Barack Obama's political relationship with a former anti-war radical, accusing him of associating "with terrorists who targeted their own country."

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin lashed out at Sen. Barack Obama's ties to controversial figure William Ayers.

Palin's attack delivered on the McCain campaign's announcement that it would step up attacks on the Democratic presidential candidate with just a month left before the November general election.

"We see America as the greatest force for good in this world," Palin said at a fund-raising event in Colorado, adding, "Our opponent though, is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."

Palin made similar comments later at a rally in Carson, California.

Obama's Chicago, Illinois, home is in the same neighborhood as Bill Ayers, a founder of the radical Weather Underground, which was involved in several bombings in the early 1970s, including the Pentagon and the Capitol, and the two have met several times since Obama's 1995 campaign for a state Senate seat.

Palin cited an article in Saturday's New York Times about Obama's relationship with Ayers, now 63. But that article concluded that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called 'somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.' "

Several other publications, including the Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The National Review, have debunked the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship.

Riot and bomb conspiracy charges against Ayers were dropped in 1974, and he is now a professor of education at the University of Illinois in Chicago.

Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan called Palin's comments "offensive" and "not surprising given the McCain campaign's statement this morning that they would be launching Swift Boat-like attacks in hopes of deflecting attention from the nation's economic ills."

With Obama rising in polls while the country struggles in the grip of a financial crisis, Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign decided to shift attention away from the troubled economy and onto issues of his opponent's character, judgment and personal associations, the Washington Post reported.

"We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative said, requesting anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss strategy. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here."

The Obama camp said the tactic wouldn't work.

"What's clear is that John McCain and Sarah Palin would rather spend their time tearing down Barack Obama than laying out a plan to build up our economy," Sevugan said.

Obama and Ayers met at meeting for a school reform project in 1995 and again later that year. Then, Ayers hosted an event where then-Illinois state Sen. Alice Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced the young community organizer as her chosen successor, campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said. Both men also served on a charitable board together, he said.

Labolt also said the two have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Obama came to the U.S. Senate in 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they encountered each other on the street in their Hyde Park neighborhood.

Obama and McCain will meet for their second debate Tuesday night and will take questions directly from voters in a town hall-style format.

[brandymac27]

Personally, I HATE the mudslinging and personal attacks from EITHER party. IMO, it's a complete turnoff. I don't care if it's coming from the right or left or both for that matter. To me, there are many more important issues that need to be discussed and addressed, rather than acting like a bunch of elementary school kids tattling and calling each other out. Frankly, I want my leaders to act like adults, but I guess in this day and age of politics that's too much to ask.

[TMat184]

Republicans don't stand a chance if the focus is on the issues....Bravo to them, smearing Obama is the only chance they've got.

[scruffylookin]

I know Ms Moron is just regurgitating talking points, but does she really want to go down this road?

Shall the Obama campaign finally start talking about her association with secessionists and a witch doctor?

Shall we ask her about her views on dinosaurs and man living together 6000 years ago?

Oh I forgot, Ms Moron did so well in the debate (according to the lunatic fringe) that they're not going to let her speak to any media anymore so we won't get the chance to ask her.

This is the final death spasm of the McCain campaign.

Obama looks, sounds and acts presidential while McCain and Ms Moron look like a pair of boobs who couldn't get a job as a clerk in an Obama administration.

This is going to be fun.

[Destino]

I think it's appropriate that McCain sell out on his last two big differences before losing in November. Voting for a bail out that had to see 100 BILLION in pork added to it to get needed support because he wouldn't have survived the fallout of sticking to his ideals. Now taking the campaign so negative that issues are pretty much not even on the table any more because he's sinking like a stone in the polls.

What we are seeing a great man fall from grace in slow motion. It started during race for the nomination - it's not going to end until the election is over. Whatever McCain stood for is a distant memory discarded on the road to the white house piece by piece. A shameful display and a warning of what the lust for power can do to even the most righteous of men.

[Jumbo]

Agreed, both campaigns have strayed from the notion that they are going to run clean campaigns (McCain morseso with his endorsed ones more than Obama with his actual endorsed ones). It's disheartening to see 2 campaigns so focused on "changing" Washington clearly and quickly digressing right back into the exact back-stabbing, muddslinging, pigpen-groveling campaign tactics the American people HATE! When are they going to get the damn memo that that is NOT want we want to hear about, if we did, we would reconvene at our grade school playground.

I swear to God, I could go out there and run a more clean, high road campaign than this...simply because my friends and I are not corrupted by washington. We know that good strategy when your opponent is talking about health care is to not only NOT bring up health care, but bring up ties with terrorist connections. NOT. That ridiculous. I'd get laughed my ass out of a debate in class this quarter if I tried that. You reply in kind: they talk about health care, you talk about health care and the differences between the 2....non of this other crap about Ayers. Good Lord.

I love Palin, but that is a bad strategical more right there.

Thing is, to take some Palin talk and just put this on a people-to-people joe six-pack and suzy football-mom basis, I could see myself voting for you as a white house occupant based on what i've read and have been able to judge of you as person, (or Burgundy Burner, or Burgold, or Henry, or twa, or techboy, or zoony to name a few), which as a group covers some diverse political leanings and no political experience, before I would give that vote to candidates like Kerry, Palin, and many others that were offered. Integrity, accountability, honesty (self and other), and fairness are not easily disposable values to me. I find them at least as important overall as what someone's actual position is on most broad topics.

[10fttall]

As far as "issues" go, I consider the mentality of my President to be a very valid issue. Obama has a mountain of evidence pointing to his willingness to embrace the radical, Blame America First crowd. I don't want that in my President. I think the majority don't want that in their President.

The fact that people even consider this smearing, is very telling. I consider it bringing issues to view that have, let's say, not received extensive attention in the "regular media."

Accusing someone of an affair or love child is a smear. Questioning an association with someone who tried to bomb American institutions, is entirely appropriate.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

"The only possible outcome of Defensive Warfare is Surrender" - Confederate General James Longstreet

ATTACK is really the only useful tactic in a political campaign. Especially with the zero intelligence, completely unthinking masses that make up probably 85-90% of the American voting populace. Being positive hasn't worked for politicians in decades. It's not going to start now.

Besides, when someone like Barrack makes it so easy to find things wrong with him, why wouldn't an opponent hammer away at those things?

[Larry]

Obama looks, sounds and acts presidential

Uh, based on the debate I saw, you must have a very low standard of "Presidential".

Based on the debate I saw, Bush is more Presidential than either of them.