2012 will be the most negative campaign we have ever seen in our lifetimes. President Obama cannot run on his record because the Hope and Change he brought us is actually higher unemployment, more government debt, and a path toward bankruptcy. In fact the Democrats have already begun running negative ads against Republican contenders.
Results show that negative ads work, and this Iowa campaign has held true to that pattern. The “Leader of the Polls” has been attacked with numerous negative ads, and that person’s poll numbers have dropped significantly after that. Rick Santorum’s results in Iowa have earned him his time in the hot seat, and the attacks are sure to come. His ability to weather the attacks will determine whether he is a serious contender or whether he will crumble under the pressure.
I think that there could be more than three tickets out of Iowa. Do not count out Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry, whose poll numbers have been rising and who have strong Tea Party support in the Palmetto State. If Rick Santorum can’t handle the upcoming attacks, expect voters to look for another option.
I think that these Iowa results set the stage for a “Battle Royale” in South Carolina and that battle may even continue into the Sunshine State. Conservatives are looking for someone to be our well-armored Paladin of Fiscal Responsibility, and the Iowa caucuses have been a good start toward finding the right candidate who can weather the storm.
— Amy Kremer is chairman of the TeaPartyExpress.org.
2012 will be the most negative campaign we have ever seen in our lifetimes.
This is true only if the rest of us are under the age of five or are suffering from amnesia. Every year some C-list pundit busts out with this stupid line. It's ridiculous. Modern times are marked by excessive niceness. Past elections were far worse.
Get a thicker skin or get out of politics.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have heard this before ever election for the last 20 years and it has generally been true. Citizen's Unite ruling almost guarantees it this time around.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere was that one election where your guy decided to trash a veteran's military service.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWould that be the election where a so called "respected newsman" pushed fraudulent documents claiming National Guard service was less than honorable? That being a fighter pilot somehow proved how much of a "moron" a certain veteran was? That not being deployed to a war that the majority of the super dooper, really smart people were protesting and calling illegal was evidence of cowardice? Surely you couldn't be referring to the veteran who actually threw away his three Purple Hearts, the ones earned from injuries requiring a simple band-aid to cover?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat mistake was immediately corrected, and the newsman was fired. Has anyone apologized for trashing a Purple Heart winner's service yet? Was anyone fired? Were there any consequences for that disgraceful display?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat Purple Heart recipient trashed his own service by throwing away his medals and associating with the totally discredited Winter Soldiers and lying about his service and being in Cambodia or some such nonsense. Throw in the Jane Fonda connection and his service was already trashed by himself. How do you commend his service in what he himself called an immoral war? Typical, you want it both ways. He was either a "hero" for volunteering for an immoral, illegal war in which he videotaped himself or a "hero" for later disavowing his own actions and lying about his fellow soldiers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's good politics for the challenger to make the argument. And yes, Obama can't run on his record. Call Obama a nasty negative campaigner who is running from his record.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI welcome a so-called negative campaign as long as our guy gives better than he gets. We all know that King Obama the Thin-Skinned is going to cry negativity simply based on any substantive discussion of his record. I am sick and tired of "the people" saying they want a campaign based on issues; a positive message. That's crap. So-called negative campaigns work. The GOP has continously shot itself in the foot trying to take the high ground. The vaunted "people" take that as weakness.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan't help but point out that, going into the caucuses, the person consistently called the 'frontrunner'--who would be the leader in the polls--had seen exactly zero negative ads placed against him. Zero.
Rick, Newt, Ron, Michelle, and Rick weren't so lucky.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse