Researching Your Opponent Is Bad Mmmmkay

Spread the love

Loading

Here is a excellent example of the MSM bias in todays media.

Republicans are planning to spend the vast majority of their sizable 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.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, which this year dispatched a half-dozen operatives to comb through tax, court and other records looking for damaging information on Democratic candidates, plans to spend more than 90 percent of its $50 million-plus advertising budget on what officials described as negative ads.

[…]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.

[…]Republicans plan to attack Democratic candidates over their voting records, business dealings, and legal tussles, the GOP officials said.

Uh, fellas…..this has been a tactic of BOTH sides for years. Democrats research their opponents also…take Boston for example where three Democrats are cutting each other to shreds:

In what could be a prelude, Reilly and Gabrieli adopted a more critical tone late last week, highlighting Patrick’s position on taxes. Reilly’s campaign asserted that voters could not trust Patrick, saying he has wavered on the question of whether to cut taxes. Gabrieli aired an ad contrasting his plan for a phased-in tax cut with Patrick’s opposition to the rollback, and with the support of Reilly and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey for an immediate reduction.

And thats against their own party member. Of course candidates attack the voting records, finances and legal troubles of their opponent. People want to know if the guy is in financial trouble, or votes for things they don’t like.

Another example of Democrats doing the same thing is the race against Santorum. Democrats charged that he moved from his Pittsburgh home to one inside the beltway but left his children enrolled in Pennsylvania public school via online courses. How did they come to this conclusion? Research.

But the bigger point is this article smells like the MSM and the Democratic party already know it’s not going so well for them. As Hugh Hewitt notes:

Plamegate fizzled out, the voters prefer the president and his party on national security and for leadership on the war, the economy is booming and the judges the president appoints and the GOP majority confirms are excellent. The campaign will be about the NSA program and other national security issues. No wonder the Dems have gone from chest thumping to disorganized confusion in a space of two weeks. Lamont’s getting creamed by Joe Lieberman: Have they begun to realize that the fever swamp, with assists from Reid, Pelosi and Leahy, have lead them over the edge?

All the talking points about a big Democratic “wave” have been internalized by the MSM, but Santorum is closing, Kean and Steele are looking great, and Kennedy, Bouchard and McGavick are pushing their Democratic incumbents hard. Less than a Democratic blowout leading to Democratic majorities in both House and Senate puts almost the entire MSM in Zogbyland, with their already tattered reputation for objectivity completely destroyed.

I have predicted for quite some time that we will not lose Congress. People are just not that stupid to put the country into the hands of the lunatics on the left. I can hear it now, all the cries about “what happened!”, “but the polls said!” after election day. As in 2004, they have become smug, believing their view is the ONLY view. How wrong they were, and still are.

[…]Bush will try to make terrorism the issue nationally, casting the election as a choice between two distinct approaches for protecting the nation from attack. Beyond that, however, most Republicans want to distance their elections from the national context.

That strategy is born of necessity.

Huh? Mid-term elections have always been about local issues. Since when has this changed. Another blantant mis-characterization by our media.

Waaaaay down in the article they finally get around to admitting that, yeah, Democrats do the research also:

[…]In recent elections, Democratic officials have complained that Republicans are much better at opposition research. But Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who chair the Democrats’ House and Senate campaign committees, have invested more heavily in research. Notably, the researchers dig not only into Republicans, but also their own candidates. This allows Democrats to anticipate what is coming and be ready to respond quickly.

Get outta here? You mean researching your opponent helps you win?

Who woulda thunk it.

Geez.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Seems to me it was Chuckie Schumer’s office who did all that “research” on Michael Steele in Maryland, wasn’t it?