Mudslinging In Campaigning

[Horndog]

sarah_ab 2020!!!!

Do you realize how absolutely annoying it is to spam that in every political thread?

moving on...

Mudslinging happens when people fail to reason. It's when people refuse to communicate their thoughts behind their ideas and slogans (i.e. "Obama is a socialist!" and "Romney is an out-of-touch millionaire!").

[ForbiddenFruit]

Do you realize how absolutely annoying it is to spam that in every political thread?

moving on...

Mudslinging happens when people fail to reason. It's when people refuse to communicate their thoughts behind their ideas and slogans (i.e. "Obama is a socialist!" and "Romney is an out-of-touch millionaire!").

What's annoying for you may be less so for some. I'm indifferent, it was funny the first few times but now I just shrug and read on.

As you said, though, it's a breakdown of reason. It's when you fail to get the logical argument to back up the emotional response. Some of it's ad-hominem (Romney's a Mormon), some of it's name calling (Obama is a Muslim / Marxist)

[Bettypooh]

What's annoying for you may be less so for some. I'm indifferent, it was funny the first few times but now I just shrug and read on.

As you said, though, it's a breakdown of reason. It's when you fail to get the logical argument to back up the emotional response. Some of it's ad-hominem (Romney's a Mormon), some of it's name calling (Obama is a Muslim / Marxist)

People are people, and some of them- no, all of us- respond differently to things. If Sarah wants to interject what she sees as humor, let her. If Belinda Sue wants to be sarcastic, then so be it. If I want to be hypercritical it's just me. It's just how each of us deals with things and so long as we mean no harm it's not really all that bad. BTW, I learned that little lesson right here on DD- thank you to Sarah,Belinda, and all for showing me somewhere I could do better

Back to the topic, in ourselves it certainly is a breakdown of reasoning, a trade-off for the emotional instead, a desire to avoid justifying what we believe or want to make our own life easier. It is a way to avoid having to face that we might be wrong In the candidates, this is done for similar reasons. They know that if we really scrutinized them as we should be doing, they would all fall short of being someone we would really want to support. They know we are more malleable through emotion than through hard logic, so that is where they aim. They know that people like to see a good show more than they do hear the boring details of exactly how they plan to do things and why they hold their beliefs that it is the right thing to do. They also don't have enough internal fortitude to stand up and say they can be as wrong as anyone else because some people will take that message as a sign of weakness instead of strength

To best analyze and understand something, you need to first dig down to the core if it all, to the most basic points where it cannot be distilled any further. Then once you understand the basic reasons you can better see what happened as the thing evolved and grew into the whole that it is. More importantly, using this approach shows you why it went that way. Is Obama Muslim? Is Romney Mormon? Maybe, but they're no more religious than any other politician we've seen on a national level. They'd both sell it all for success at what they want, and they both know that it is best to not show yourself as being deeply religious if you want the votes of support from people with other religious beliefs. But it makes for some really good mud to sling on your opposition, especially when addressing those of you're own kind who support you

The politics I've seen world-wide is like this because they are manipulating human behavior (ie getting your vote) as best they can, an mudslinging works because we really do not want to have to face the stark reality of politicians being rather worthless immoral unscrupulous individuals who will do anything to get elected- including slinging mud to divert our attention from where it should be. Until we humans as a whole outgrow their immaturity (and our own as well) the crop of politicians we get to vote for for will remain as they are now. And we will continue to get what we do now- failed policies, wars, social strife, higher taxes, and inequality as the standard.

We can change that but will we?

Bettypooh

[sarah_ab]

Do you realize how absolutely annoying it is to spam that in every political thread?

moving on...

Mudslinging happens when people fail to reason. It's when people refuse to communicate their thoughts behind their ideas and slogans (i.e. "Obama is a socialist!" and "Romney is an out-of-touch millionaire!").

hahahah dude this thread is a joke - i mean no matter what you say you cannot change someone elses mind on politics...

do you realize that pointing out how annoying people are is annoying as well? lol... so pffffttttttt

sarah_ab 2020!!!!

[Alexandra]

sarah I never intended to change anyones poltical opinions I was just looking for others opinion on a campaigning technique that I personally find to just be distasteful tripe

[Horndog]

I also believe mudslinging is an addiction; a disease. The only cure is to turn off the television and do research.

[sarah_ab]

sorry alexandra, i meant what this and most political/religious threads turn into.. people going back and forth attempting to change someones opinion... the initial intent of most the political religious threads is for legit discussion, but they all end up turning into the same thing! lol...

but apparently i am spamming this thread...

[Horndog]

sorry alexandra, i meant what this and most political/religious threads turn into.. people going back and forth attempting to change someones opinion... the initial intent of most the political religious threads is for legit discussion, but they all end up turning into the same thing! lol...

Most political threads on message boards morph into mixed nuts, but discussing politics can be enlightening for those who want to know more about the times they're living in.

[Bettypooh]

....but apparently i am spamming this thread...

Well then toss in some bread so we can have "spamwiches"

Bettypooh

[sarah_ab]

ohhh man i haven't had spam in forever.. my fav. is spam moosobi? not sure how u spell it.. spam, and white rice wrapped in nori roll.. delicious!

[Diapered Jason]

Did Obama hire Karl Rove, because he is using one of his tactics? Anyways, mudslinging, this is why it is so useful for campaigns. You can turn your opponent's strength into a weakness. In this case, Romney's business experience at Bain Capital, his reasoning for being an adept job creator, is being used against him.

[Bettypooh]

In this world, almost nothing is 100%. There is nothing universally good- someone somewhere will be harmed in any action What politicians have to decide it whether and how to minimize that effect. Who can prove that one candidate has caused more good that the other, or can potentially do that? Who has caused more employment, Obama or Romney, and how can you prove such a vague concept? And both have caused some job loss by the very actions that created other jobs. To address these kinds of things you have to make yourself look better than your opponent, or try to make them look worse than you, or both. Most candidates choose both It is done because it is effective, not because it is right or good

Personally I make my choice based on what I believe is good and possible, not on what is popular (mudslinging). Sadly I am given just two possible choices when neither is much good in my eyes I am now out to change the system more than to choose between bad and worse, the status quo for my whole life and a very bad one at that

Bettypooh

[Diapered Jason]

In this world, almost nothing is 100%. There is nothing universally good- someone somewhere will be harmed in any action What politicians have to decide it whether and how to minimize that effect. Who can prove that one candidate has caused more good that the other, or can potentially do that? Who has caused more employment, Obama or Romney, and how can you prove such a vague concept? And both have caused some job loss by the very actions that created other jobs. To address these kinds of things you have to make yourself look better than your opponent, or try to make them look worse than you, or both. Most candidates choose both It is done because it is effective, not because it is right or good

Personally I make my choice based on what I believe is good and possible, not on what is popular (mudslinging). Sadly I am given just two possible choices when neither is much good in my eyes I am now out to change the system more than to choose between bad and worse, the status quo for my whole life and a very bad one at that

Bettypooh

Now you are getting it. Mudslinging is done because it is effective, especially if you have someone skilled in the art of manipulation (strategic communications) working with you. It is vital for our country we change the campaign laws and the way we elect politicians, because it is true this is all pointless in the grand scheme of things. With the main attraction being the distraction, we get nothing done as is clearly seen.

[Bettypooh]

....With the main attraction being the distraction, we get nothing done as is clearly seen.

And that is by plan- aka mudslinging. It keeps the average person away from those unattractive, pesky things called 'facts'

Until the people stop voting for mudslingers, they will get what they deserve- a choice between two worthless deceptive liars

Fix the system America- get rid of political power and the bad people will leave the system

Bettypooh

[Horndog]

I think mudslinging also plays into our natural inclination (as humans) to be provocative and in control.

[Bettypooh]

I think mudslinging also plays into our natural inclination (as humans) to be provocative and in control.

It also plays on our human desire for attention and to be the first to state (or to be going along with) what we hope is a popular idea. I have made it a habit to study human nature in people. I have found many who seek popular acceptance are uneasy stating their ideas at first, going carefully form saying something to 'test the waters' of their audience onto more direct notions if they find their audience in agreement. I like to jump in at that point with my opposition (if I am opposed) to show that person that their ideas are not as well-formed as they should be, and might be in error It gains me enemies to do this, but those people would have never become a friend anyway so I feel no loss. Indeed, I have heard from many after such incidents that they are glad I stopped the (fill in the blank with a term of derision) in their tracks before they could get rolling I don't do this to 'sling mud', but to stop it from being slung, and many people appreciate this as it makes life nicer for all of us- save for the mudslinger

Bettypooh

[BoTox]

I'm seeing this more in the republican ads but now I'm also seeing this in Obama's ads as well and its really annoying me to no end, mudslinging. Why is this so effective, why are people so easily taken in by this type of campaigning. I wish there was a candidate who didn't just say the other guy sucks so vote for me and instead told people why they would make a good candidate. I mean is that really so hard a thing to do not use slander and libel to beat your opponet its a disgrace to the basis of American politics if you ask me

Mudslinging in politics predates the United States and has been a tried and true tactic for centuries if not millennium. I would have to say that George Washington, not needing to campaign, was the only US president that wasn't involved in some sort of mud slinging.

Other than that it is always 'the other side' that slings mud while 'my guy' is honest and telling the truth.

Personally, I vote on one and only one issue, second amendment. Honor it and I honor you with my vote. Dishonor it or pay lip service to it and I will do all in my power to defeat you.

[Diapered Jason]

Mudslinging in politics predates the United States and has been a tried and true tactic for centuries if not millennium. I would have to say that George Washington, not needing to campaign, was the only US president that wasn't involved in some sort of mud slinging.

Other than that it is always 'the other side' that slings mud while 'my guy' is honest and telling the truth.

This is true, and I think the only reason people are noticing or seeing it more now is because we are, as a country, more polarized than ever. Not good.

[Bettypooh]

This is true, and I think the only reason people are noticing or seeing it more now is because we are, as a country, more polarized than ever. Not good.

Not necessarily 'not good' Such strength of opinion has always happened before all the biggest changes Civil War and Civil rights are just two examples. Those big changes have never gone easily, but in the end have created large jumps in progress. How this applies here I don't know but I hope it changes the political system to something ethical Here in a nearby county, one candidate just got arrested for trying to arrange the kidnapping of his rival And through some screwed up laws and the politics of those currently in office who caused them to be applied wrongfully, hundreds of candidates got wiped off the primary ballots for doing what they were told to do by those same people It's totally nutso and totally the time for big changes.

Bettypooh

[Diapered Jason]

Congress will do every stupid thing and kick the can down road until there is nothing left to do but do what is necessary. That is always what they do. I am not extremely worried yet.