Negative Ads- What Republicans Do Best!

GOP Plans More Negative Ads Than Ever
Republicans are planning to spend the vast majority of their considerable financial war chest over the final 60 days of the campaign attacking Democratic House and Senate candidates over personal issues and local controversies, GOP officials said in The Washington Post on Sunday. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) plans to spend more than 90 percent of its $50 million-plus advertising budget on what officials described as negative ads. Because challengers tend to be less familiar than incumbents, they are more vulnerable to having their public image framed by the opposition through attacks and unflattering personal revelations. GOP officials said internal polling shows Republicans could limit losses to six to 10 House seats and two or three Senate seats if the strategy works. Democrats need to pick up 15 seats to win control of the House and six to regain power in the Senate. Republicans plan to attack Democratic candidates over their voting records, business dealings, and legal tussles, the GOP officials said.

From the Washington Post:

In a Pivotal Year, GOP Plans to Get Personal

Millions to Go to Digging Up Dirt on Democrats

"Opposition research is power," said Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (N.Y.), the NRCC chairman. "Opposition research is the key to defining untested opponents."

The Republican National Committee, meanwhile, has enlisted veteran party strategist Terry Nelson to run a campaign that will coordinate with Senate Republicans on ads that similarly will rely on the best of the worst that researchers have dug up on Democrats. The first ad run by the new RNC effort criticizes Ohio Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) for voting against proposals designed to toughen border protection and deport illegal immigrants.

Because challengers tend to be little-known compared with incumbents, they are more vulnerable to having their public image framed by the opposition through attacks and unflattering personal revelations.

Contact Mark Kennedy's Office
and tell him:
"Now is not a time for slime"
Fax: (320) 259-0786


Norseman said...

The comparable is what Green was caught doing (using actors to represent regular people). I suspect that is a closer reflection of what he really is, "a hypocrite".

UW Alum said...


I don't want a Green Governor. I didn't see the ad, but I'm not sure I
have a problem with using actors for political adds. They are selling something, most ads don't have "real People" why should political ads.
From the description I've heard I'm more ticked off about the message.
The UW-System took 39% of the total state budget cuts in the last budget from the REPUBLICAN legislature.
The only alternative the universities had to keep operating was to raise tuition. So it's the REPUBLICAN legistlature that's responsible for the tuition hikes, NOT DOYLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

New Comer said...

The funding cuts by Republicans are something that I've heard both Shelia Harsdorf and Kitty Rhoades speak to, concerning the state university system. They both say it is a constant battle against their fellow Republicans to get funding for the university systems. Maybe 75 percent of the representatives don't have universities in their districts. Is fairly easy for them to cut the budgets and follow the herd. For this Hardsorf and Rhoades get called RINOs by the ontheborderline.net types.

Another point is that an even larger portion of legislators did not attend UW-Madison and that makes its reputation of a progressive learning institution subject to attack by those that want to return us to the "good old days."

uw alum said...

This type of cutting of State Universities is going on across the nation. In my few it's an attempt by Republicans to make a college education what it used to be, a priviledge for the wealthy only and they are succeeding. What's laughable is that they are so brilliant in their political manipulation that they do the damage and try to blame it on Democrats. Kick these bums out of office. Vote straight Democratic!!!!!

norseman said...

uw alum
I don't object to the use of actors where and when apparent, but do when an add implies that they are real people. But then I would prefer that all candidates stick to the meat of their adjenda. All to often the focus of campaigns tend to get stuck in the mud. That is my personal opinion, even though I recognize that "mud slinging" is nothing new.

JPN said...

Does the ad say the commercial is using actors? Are the viewers being led to believe they are actors?

Here's an excert from a 9/16 Pioneer Press story about the ads:

"Doyle's campaign pounced on the revelation late Friday, hours before the two candidates were to square off in their first debate.

"Congressman Green can't find any real middle-class and working families to buy the cheap distortions that he's spinning," said spokeswoman Melanie Fonder. "If you don't have any real Wisconsin families who support those distortions, I guess you have to find some make-believe ones."

The ad features Green and his wife, Sue, sitting next to two couples at a high school football game. One couple claims their son has been put on a waiting list for an unidentified UW school even though he was on the honor roll.

"They are letting out-of-state kids in who have worse grades than the Wisconsin kids who don't get in," one male actor says.

"I thought it was called the University of Wisconsin," a female actor says.

"It gets worse," Green tells them. "Jim Doyle raised tuition for Wisconsin families and actually cut it for out-of-staters."

Doyle's ads have used real Wisconsin voters to drive home his message.

In his first ad, nine citizens tout aspects of Doyle's record as their names are flashed on the screen. In another, Jody Montgomery of Verona holds her diabetes-stricken daughter to praise Doyle's stance on stem cell research and call Green "too extreme."

Green's ad on Friday takes aim at two major issues facing Wisconsin families: rising tuition and perceived difficulties getting into some UW campuses.

The ad refers to a June vote by the UW System Board of Regents to cut tuition for out-of-state students at all UW campuses except UW-Madison while raising tuition by 6.8 percent for resident students."
Here's the link to the complete story:

Is Green using actors because he can't actually find real people to support his position. Doyle is able to find real people to support his position.

Like Green, Paul R. Nelson is using actors in his radio commercials who are discussing issues and incidents that are not based on the facts or reality. Here's a link to two of Nelson's commercails.


But then again, the intend of the commercials are not to get out the facts. The intent is to appeal to the emotions, ignorance and laziness of the voters and to get them to vote for Mark Green and Paul Nelson. Green's commercials are Rove-light, while Nelson's are straight Rove with no chaser.

uw alum said...


I think I mentioned, I didn't see the ad. Maybe, I shouldn't have commented since I didn't see it. My opinion is that it really depends on how the people are portrayed in the add. If the intent was to portray them as real people, then I'm bothered by it. Maybe I'm assuming a level of media literacy that doesn't exist among a large number of voters.

Paul R. Nelson's ads are ridiculous, maybe people will be wise enough to see through his pandering. Even if I agreed with his side of these issues these ads are a turn off. I'd like to see a statistic on how many married women with children in Wisconsin have had late term partial birth abortions. I think all of them only exist in the imaginations of Paul R. Nelson and his campaign manager. There are many, many more issues that demand attention over these fictional women.