We’ve noticed a lot of this attack dog mentality among supporters of both candidates recently at KP.
Democratic Party chief Howard Dean says Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and their supporters should beware of tearing each other down, demoralizing the base and damaging the party’s chances of winning the White House in November. ...Mr. Dean said the charges and countercharges between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have gotten too personal at times. He declined to say how they have crossed the line, but said he has made it clear privately when it has happened.
“You do not want to demoralize the base of the Democratic Party by having the Democrats attack each other,” he said in an interview Thursday at his Democratic National Committee headquarters office. “Let the media and the Republicans and the talking heads on cable television attack and carry on, fulminate at the mouth. The supporters should keep their mouths shut about this stuff on both sides, because that is harmful to the potential victory of a Democrat.”
Good catch, PD
Yeah, I’ve noticed this, too. It’s really been bad, not just for the party but for the idea of political debate itself.
Fomer Deaniacs
It will be interesting to see how Obama supporters, many of whom I suspect were also Dean supporters, react to Dean’s call for restraint.
pd
so you're implying ...
... that Obama and his supporters have been more negative? ... Please.
The Clinton campaign’s stated strategy has been to “throw the kitchen sink” at Obama … to see that he is properly “vetted”.
I wonder how the Clinton people, who’s entire campaign has rested on trying to destroy Obama’s character — only to see that strategy backfire — will respond to Dean’s call for peace.
Today, both candidates went positive. Although they were critical of each other’s policies, which is fair game, both spoke about how they hoped their supporters would support the Democratic candidate in the general election. I thought that was fantastic. They both look like better candidates when they compliment each other. Let’s hope it continues.
Inference
I asked how Obama supporters would react. (Judging from the comments on this site, the Obama supporters seem much more shrill, but maybe that’s just an over-enthusiastic minority.)You answered my question by inferring negativity. That’s interesting to me.
FTR, I agree both candidates are better off sticking to issues and policy and how either are both candidate’s positions are far superior to anything McCain and the rw reactionaries of the GOP have to offer.
pd
restraint?
Please! Give me a break! If anything the Obama campaign has been more than patient with HRC. The known dirty tricks her and Bill have been playing should have brought in Dean months ago. Having Bill go on Rush Limbaughs show touting his wife for president and then HRC endorsing McCain should have brought a much harsher warning from the DNC.
welcome it
As an Obama supporter, I welcome Dean’s call for restraint.
It helps the Democratic Party, while giving neither Democratic candidate an advantage or disadvantage over the other.
Clinton’s “kitchen sink” campaign has been a double-edged sword — it has hurt Obama, but it has also hurt Clinton, while mostly helping McCain.
A more restrained campaign makes both Democratic candidates look better.
the obvious best tactic for
the obvious best tactic for garnering votes is to show that you are the best able to dethrone St. McCain from his undeserved reputation for “straight Talk”. Both candidates and all their surrogates need to remember this 24/7
electibility
That’s very disturbing, that in republican ereas (middle states, rich neighborhoods) )bama is winning. That raises the question, who is financihim. Probably it worths to knock out a viable and intelligent democratic candidate, that she would not pose threat to hte republicans in November. Also: the big corporations do not want the working class’s favorit to be elected, because they do not want to share the profit.
Why the Michogan and the Florida wotes do not count?
Post new comment