Loading ...ATTACK OF THE ADS
Both Jim Schellinger and Jill Long Thompson are accusing each other of running negative ads. I’ve posted them both here so you can make the judgment for yourself. I honestly don’t think either one is much of a big deal.
I’ll be interested in your thoughts.
April 24th, 2008 at 9:33 am
I decided a few years back that regardless of party when the candidate went negative, implied facts not true or stretched beyond the truth so badly that they lost focus on civility I would not endorse or vote for their election. I am sorry to report that my party has candidates that do all this and more and that the Republican’s also are knee deep in mudd. That leaves me void of a candidate that deserves my endorsement and vote.
And these people wonder why we average American’s think it makes no difference. Obama is so popular because of peoples perceptions that he is not part of this mess (not that he is or isn’t). The only sad part of Hillary is thinking about another 4 or 8 years for Rush Limbaugh to air his attacks and indecencies. Can’t we shut him up long enough to find good candidates. He can’t stand his own party’s candidate. Negative is a destruction of democracy. But alas, my good baptist friends will tell you that the Lord is on his way even now.
April 24th, 2008 at 9:44 am
If your Baptist friends are right, then they may be in for a BIG surprise. ;)
Negativity in campaigning is something I don’t like either. But then, campaigns don’t pay me for my advice, or take it for free either.
A really good candidate would just look aggrieved, sigh, and say something about how things would be so much better without the hate.
It’s like politicians despise their Moms, or something. Otherwise, they would have paid attention when she said, “If you can’t say something nice about somebody, then it’s better to say nothing at all”. And, with the primary election coming right before Mothers’ Day too.
April 24th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Paybacks a bitch.
April 24th, 2008 at 11:39 am
I always felt i had the pulse beat of people when I was in politics. Now we are 30 years later and those people whose pulse I knew so well died and my own generation is there to gage the pulse. I am finding that this hatred, nastiness, accusatory politics reminds me of reading about the fall of the Roman Empire at its height. I am saddened that politics has gotten so much more worse than better in my lifetime. But, hey I will keep on trucking along doing taxes, handling governmental affairs/problems and paying my bills and not be so worried about it I can’t function at those things that matter most, making money/living and being happy in other endeavors.
April 24th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Whose book on the “Fall of the Roman Empire” did you read? LOL
April 24th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Did Schellinger pay for that shot of Long-Thompson that is in his ad?
April 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Candidate Schellinger, in his priovate life, gave aid to school corproations who were, at ebst, trying to hide information from taxpayers about expensive buildings.
Look, we all know schools need remodeled and sometimes replaced. But the Indiana school dsign/build industry is known nationwide as wasteful and duplicitous.
It’s one of many issues on which I’ve based my vote, but not the only one.
Jill OR Jim would do a better job than the current munchkin occupying the gubernatorial fofice.
I favor Jill for now–by a small margin. The “negative” ads didn’t influlence me one way or the other. I took the time to read newspaper clips and their websites to determine their views.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Did Schellinger pay for that shot of Long-Thompson that is in his ad?
I don’t know. Did JL-T pay for that Indy 500 crash footage?
April 24th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
The 500 footage is probably “public domain” by now.
The Schellinger campaign could probably make an argument that the JLT footage was usuable for a couple of reasons. I seriously doubt they ever considered paying anybody for it.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
I’m sure that’s stock footage that anyone can buy. jim S.’s campaign would have had to get the footage they used from Jill’s campaign. Do you really think they would sell to their competition?
April 24th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Does it really matter?
April 24th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Mr. Howard asks the brilliant question.
And now for a (hopefully) equally-smart answer: no.
April 24th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I thought as much.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Does plagiarism or copyright infringement matter? It is a legal and ethical question, OF COURSE IT MATTERS!!
April 25th, 2008 at 11:40 am
“Does it really matter” that anyone *speculates* about it! As they say, put up or shut up. But it’s easier to suggest impropriety than it is to find out the truth firsthand.
Political candidates have been using each others’ photos forever.
April 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
OK John Howard, I’ll “put up.” I did the research and I know FOR A FACT that Schellinger’s campaign DID NOT go to the originator of that footage and: 1. ask to use it and 2. pay for it. And yes, the 500 footage was stock footage that was paid for. So what does that mean John? As you said above, there is impropriety, actually way more than a mere impropreity, laws were broken. And it is NOT SPECULATION, it is the “truth firsthand.” Do we want a Governor that will break laws to get what his ego demands? I think not!
April 25th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Just think how much farther ahead we’d have been if you’d done that in the first place instead of dropping cheap innuendos!
April 25th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
I didn’t drop cheap innuendos. I asked questions based on hunches that I was pretty sure about, then I checked my facts. Isn’t that how you do it? Ask questions-get the facts? It’s pretty obvious that they stole that shot of Long Thompson, and that ain’t right, no matter how you spin it.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Kurt…Ballard’s campaign was won by an unendorsed negative grassroots campaign. Negative works best when the candidate’s hands never get dirty.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
This is getting complex for my feeble mind. You vote Republican, and possibly make a difference in removing a grotesque, anachronistic embarassment representing district and state in Washington, only to replace him with someone who’ll vote similarly on issues. Or, vote Democratic and possibly make a difference making sure either a messiah-like orator of murky but very suspicious influences and leanings, or a woman of unmurky socialistic ideology and a greater shot at the Presidency is denied in the Fall. AND, I could help make sure a Democratic governor is not from an industry which will assure us of continued abuse in over-facilitization. Decisions…Decisions…