Who won with no negative ads?

[Fast_Eddie]

How 'bout this - how many candidates can you name who won last night witout running any negative ads? I have exactly *one*. Gov. of Denver, John Hickenlooper made a pledge at the beginning of the campaign and he stuck to it. And he won- big.

Any others out there?

[CarlV]

That would be nice. I suppose you all saw this.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...ons&id=7747828
Though Jerry did use attack ads, his were true as Meggie has way too much baggage and and easy pickins. Meggie used every double spin in her ads that was possible though.

[Gaspode]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

How 'bout this - how many candidates can you name who won last night witout running any negative ads? I have exactly *one*. Gov. of Denver, John Hickenlooper made a pledge at the beginning of the campaign and he stuck to it. And he won- big.

Any others out there?

I'm shocked there was even one. Negative ads do their work on me in a way - they make me negative towards whoever runs them. Most of the ads in my neck of the woods were negative and misleading - on both sides.

[CarlV]

"The clear and obvious right thing to do is for Meg Whitman to take down an ad that doesn't tell the truth," said spokesman Sterling Clifford.
The Whitman campaign declined.
"That's ridiculous," said Darrel Ng, a Whitman spokesman

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep...inton-20100911

Jerry had plenty of true material and didn't need to lie though. He always has been honest to a fault kinda like Reagan was.
And yes, this was the 3rd time I voted for him.

[d-ray657]

Interesting that the current Republican governor, Ahhnold, would not endorse the Republican Candidate. I guess the tea partiers would consider him a girly man when it comes to taking a chunk out of the Dems.

Regards,

D-Ray

[merrylander]

We had a nice one here in MD, O'Malley's opponent had some robo calls going in the evening of election day stating that they were from O'Malley's campaign, that he had already won, so they need not bother to come out and vote. Nice folks those Repubs.

[JJIII]

Originally Posted by merrylander

We had a nice one here in MD, O'Malley's opponent had some robo calls going in the evening of election day stating that they were from O'Malley's campaign, that he had already won, so they need not bother to come out and vote. Nice folks those Repubs.

You've got to be pulling our leg, right?

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by JJIII

You've got to be pulling our leg, right?

It happened. That it was GOP operatives who did it is, at this point, only a reasonable inference.

Regards,

D-Ray

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

It happened. That it was GOP operatives who did it is, at this point, only a reasonable inference.

Regards,

D-Ray

I see no problem with this do you D-Man?

I mean we are protected by the first amendment to lie as much as we like, right?

It's not like they yelled fire in a crowded theater.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by noonereal

I see no problem with this do you D-Man?

I mean we are protected by the first amendment to lie as much as we like, right?

It's not like they yelled fire in a crowded theater.

It wasn't the speech at issue. It was the conduct. It's called fraud. There are no nuances of opinion mixed with fact. It was a specific identifiable falsehood, with an easily identifiable motive to cause people not to vote, based on the false information. This is actual conduct that can be addressed and punished without chilling anything other than the intent to interfere with the election process.

I know that there is a reasonable theory that Fox uses misinformation to cause people to vote in a particular way. Unless one could identify specific facts, which are defamatory or fraudulent, and which are published with knowledge of its falsity, or with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity (and which satisfy the other elements of defamation or fraud) there is no basis for legal action.

Regards,

D-Ray