Watch the ad at the top of the page.
It is banned from TV. Actually I do not know why.
There are ad's all over the country that make loose connections like this.
Should this ad be banned?
Now, if you want to ask, "Should ad's like this not be in politics at all?" then the answer would be yes.
I am sick of all the ads like this....but I don't think it should be banned...especially if there is truth to it.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
What do you think of this ad?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
I do not believe this ad should be banned, at least not for sexual content.
I'm sure that it is misleading, because I know how these things work. They take a defense spending bill which may have a number of versions, ammendments and procedural votes and they take whichever of the votes make a guy look bad in the ad and imply that this is the way he finally voted.
Then they take a budget bill that has thousands of research grants in it for anything from the items in the ad to researching the resistance of cotton to bollweevils and if the guy voted for the overall bill, they say he specifically voted for these things. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Republics, who have ALL THE POWER in Congress, but these sex things in the bills JUST SO they can use them in ads like this.
The ad is misleading and if the center and right that it's directed at are as intelligent as you proclaim them to be, they will see right through it.
But it shouldn't be banned. In fact, I think it will make Nelson look worse than his opponent.
I agree rhyno. Anybody can do it.
there is no way anyone can claim one party does this...its crap on both ends
On the surface, I don't think they should be banned. I don't even have a problem with the ads if they are true. If they mislead in the manner described by Jim, then two things must happen: the accused needs to respond in some manner to prove his true position on the bills mentioned, and the constituency needs to be informed as to the nature of the bills described. I don't care for the tactic, but how can we prohibit the use of an opponents voting record in campaign ads? I think the answer lies in line-item vetoes that will keep bills free of ad ons that can't gain support on their own. Then, it would be harder to create these misleading ads.
I don't think there's anything wrong with it -- it's no different than a lot of other campaign ads. At least this one cites sources for its claims, which most negative campaign ads don't do.
no, they usually do...
Not so precisely and detail-oriented as this one. Specific grants, etc.
Post a Comment