Obama's relentless negativity
President, unable to run on his own record, keeps attacking Romney
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Susan Walsh/AP
President Obama has waged a negative campaign against Mitt Romney.
Related Stories
- Free speech? It's not quite that simple
- With Romney at N.H. compound, Obama remembers Greyhound vacations, chugs beer
- Ann Romney says Mitt’s campaign is considering a female running mate
- Obama campaign official: We could lose this election
- The ho-hum race for the White House
- Obama campaign woos Hispanic vote with TV, radio ads
There is a saying that “politics ain’t beanbag,” referring to the hostile nature that is often encountered in the throes of campaigns and elections. And though we’ve seen fierce battles in past, most recently between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in 2008’s Democratic primaries, the fight between those two opponents pales in comparison to the mudslinging we’ve seen in 2012.
It’s also mostly been one-sided.
While the more meek Mitt Romney has stuck to challenging the President on the issues of the day, like Obama’s feeble economic record, Obama’s campaign has spent weeks attacking Romney on everything but the issues.
Thus far, we’ve heard Obama disingenuously charge that Romney is anti-education and accuse him of not wanting to invest in the future — while also ridiculing Romney’s personal wealth. We’ve heard Obama aide Stephanie Cutter make unsubstantiated and off-the-wall claims that Romney could be a felon for allegedly not paying his taxes. Vice President Joe Biden has tried to convince voters that Romney wants to return to the days of slavery, and a pro-Obama Super PAC, Priorities USA, released an ad that accused Romney of causing a women’s death by shutting down a steel plant. Plus, there’s the whole spurious “war on women.”
They have gone too far. Negative advertising and targeted attacks on the stump can do damage. But they also run the risk of backfiring.
Polls do show that Obama's smear campaign against Romney has worked to a degree. But not without harm to himself: While there has been an uptick in Romney’s negatives, both candidates have suffered. Surprisingly, the negative tone of the campaign has taken a greater toll on Obama, the man responsible (if indirectly) for most of the vitriol. According to an NBC/WSJ poll conducted in late July, “very negative” views of both are now at a record high, with 32% holding a “very negative” view of Obama, and 24% of Romney.
Those numbers represent unusually high dissatisfaction this early into the race. They’re also tough to turn around this late in the game.
First, voters aren’t stupid. They understand when a line has been crossed and attacks get so vicious and detached from reality that the negative attack triggers the opposite of the intended result. The electorate tends to side with an underdog when lines are crossed by his opponent. So when CBS News ran a damaging piece on George W. Bush’s military service in 2004 that turned out to be largely untrue, many voters sympathized with Bush.
Secondly, when the primary issue for voters is the economy, harping about tax returns and charging that your opponent hates women and children makes Obama look out of touch. Never underestimate how savvy the electorate is when it comes to the economy. If people are hurting like they are now, they want answers about the doom-and-gloom employment situation, not personal jabs.
John McCain made this mistake in 2008: Rather than talk about the financial collapse as people’s retirement plans dissipated before their very eyes, he focused on Bill Ayers and Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, much to his campaign’s detriment.
There is also risk that voters will become so disgusted with this race that they will choose not to vote altogether. Currently, the enthusiasm is firmly with Republicans and the Romney-Ryan ticket, not Obama’s base, much of which has been left disillusioned with his record. If Obama lowers the bar any further, he runs the risk of alienating swing voters and independents who are so disgusted with the entire process they simply choose to stay home.
Romney may have taken heat for playing too nice — but it could pay off in the end. By sticking to solutions and staying above board, he can be the positive, inclusive alternative to the negative and nasty Obama of 2012. In other words, the kind of candidate Obama claimed to be in 2008.
andrea@andreatantaros.com
It’s also mostly been one-sided.
While the more meek Mitt Romney has stuck to challenging the President on the issues of the day, like Obama’s feeble economic record, Obama’s campaign has spent weeks attacking Romney on everything but the issues.
Thus far, we’ve heard Obama disingenuously charge that Romney is anti-education and accuse him of not wanting to invest in the future — while also ridiculing Romney’s personal wealth. We’ve heard Obama aide Stephanie Cutter make unsubstantiated and off-the-wall claims that Romney could be a felon for allegedly not paying his taxes. Vice President Joe Biden has tried to convince voters that Romney wants to return to the days of slavery, and a pro-Obama Super PAC, Priorities USA, released an ad that accused Romney of causing a women’s death by shutting down a steel plant. Plus, there’s the whole spurious “war on women.”
They have gone too far. Negative advertising and targeted attacks on the stump can do damage. But they also run the risk of backfiring.
Polls do show that Obama's smear campaign against Romney has worked to a degree. But not without harm to himself: While there has been an uptick in Romney’s negatives, both candidates have suffered. Surprisingly, the negative tone of the campaign has taken a greater toll on Obama, the man responsible (if indirectly) for most of the vitriol. According to an NBC/WSJ poll conducted in late July, “very negative” views of both are now at a record high, with 32% holding a “very negative” view of Obama, and 24% of Romney.
Those numbers represent unusually high dissatisfaction this early into the race. They’re also tough to turn around this late in the game.
First, voters aren’t stupid. They understand when a line has been crossed and attacks get so vicious and detached from reality that the negative attack triggers the opposite of the intended result. The electorate tends to side with an underdog when lines are crossed by his opponent. So when CBS News ran a damaging piece on George W. Bush’s military service in 2004 that turned out to be largely untrue, many voters sympathized with Bush.
Secondly, when the primary issue for voters is the economy, harping about tax returns and charging that your opponent hates women and children makes Obama look out of touch. Never underestimate how savvy the electorate is when it comes to the economy. If people are hurting like they are now, they want answers about the doom-and-gloom employment situation, not personal jabs.
John McCain made this mistake in 2008: Rather than talk about the financial collapse as people’s retirement plans dissipated before their very eyes, he focused on Bill Ayers and Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, much to his campaign’s detriment.
There is also risk that voters will become so disgusted with this race that they will choose not to vote altogether. Currently, the enthusiasm is firmly with Republicans and the Romney-Ryan ticket, not Obama’s base, much of which has been left disillusioned with his record. If Obama lowers the bar any further, he runs the risk of alienating swing voters and independents who are so disgusted with the entire process they simply choose to stay home.
Romney may have taken heat for playing too nice — but it could pay off in the end. By sticking to solutions and staying above board, he can be the positive, inclusive alternative to the negative and nasty Obama of 2012. In other words, the kind of candidate Obama claimed to be in 2008.
andrea@andreatantaros.com
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/obama-relentless-negativity-article-1.1143143#ixzz24hfLlUy3
No comments:
Post a Comment