I think Newt will definitely be pointing to this- he is already mad about the Super Pac. I am not sure the net outcome it will have on Romney though- this could help with the moderate crowd.
So now we destroy our own while O'Bama plays on the beach. I don't feel that is extremely smart for us.
I haven't really seen anything different in this primary than in previous ones (on both sides) so I disagree.
I thought you would disagree.
The Eleventh Commandment (Ronald Reagan): "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.".
I'll admit I haven't done much reading on the primaries of back then (and I certainly wasn't alive) but I find it hard to believe that there was no negative talk in primaries. I know for a fact that even a century before though there were some very heated primaries where candidates did say why they were right and others wrong. From Kennedy on, negative publicity spread wide and always affected candidates through mass media too.
It actually started with
Goldwater in November 1964. And there was plenty of bad blood in the party. But you just did not trash each other until the party had no chance of winning. Not all the RINO and other childish crap that goes on today. That is why I think the republicans will give B.O. 4 more years if they don't knock it off.
It's not like Democrats don't do it too (remember the whole who would you rather have answer that midnight call ad by Hilary?). Obama is the incumbent and so is unchallenged from his own party- he will have that advantage as incumbents, both GOP and Dem, always do. But there is a silver lining here: anything that is awfully bad will mean a candidate will get ousted and the nominee will know what negative attacks he will probably face vs. Obama. The ones with the worst negative attacks will likely get weeded out so the chosen candidate has relatively tolerable negative attributes.
Similar threads
