Political Slander: Does it Help or Hurt a Campaign?

The blogosphere is a region in which a multitude of thoughts and ideas reside on a number of issues affecting a specific niche of people or the population of the world at large. I took some time this week to explore the blogosphere and see what it has to offer. A specific part of the blogosphere, in which I took a personal interest, is in the 2008 Presidential election. A great deal of issues have come up regarding the way that each of the Presidential candidates have been running their respective campaigns. One of the ways, in which the candidates have been attempting to fire up their campaigns has been through attacking other candidates and their platforms. I explored a couple of posts regarding these attacks that have been occuring in the 2008 Presidential campaign. The first post that I explored on this subject is "Desperate Clinton Grabs at Straws to Attack Obama" by Mark C. Eades who is a writer and humanities educator based in the San Francisco Bay Area. His post discusses the negative shift that Sen. Clinton has had to take against Sen. Obama and his campaign. The second post "McCain Attacks Obama on Pakistan;Unilateral U.S. Attacks in Pakistan Could Increase" is by Arif Rafiq, a policy and communications consultant, based in New York. His post discusses the attacks by President Bush and Sen. McCain against Obama and his supposed plans for Pakistan. I have offered my comments on their posts below as well as directly on the authors’ respective blogs.

Comment:
I thoroughly enjoyed your post and the manner in which you discussed the shift that Sen. Hillary Clinton has had to make in order to ensure that she does not fall behind in the race for the democratic nomination. As evidence comes out that Sen. Clinton is falling behind she is attempting to salvage her campaign strategy and she is doing so by taking an aggressive stance towards Sen. Obama and his campaign tactics. She has had to make this shift because Sen. Obama has moved a great deal of his focus from Sen. Clinton and has began to look ahead, fixating on the issues at hand in the general election and has started to engage Sen. McCain. While Sen. Obama sidesteps Clinton and gives off the vibe that she is no longer a threat, she is forced to address Sen. Obama in some manner. In the past few days, the manner in which she has chosen to engage Sen. Obama has been through attacking his speeches and his lack of interest in debating Sen. Clinton. While I understand the reasoning behind Sen. Clinton wanting more debates in order to raise money and free time, I feel that the way she is going about the process itself is childish and unprofessional. While I appreciate your thoughts and your overall understanding of what has gone on, I wonder if these negative tactics might help Sen. Clinton because of the public who might take her at her word. Sen. Clinton scolds Sen. Obama for using the words of a supporter, Deval Patrick, while she twists the words of her opponent and chants "Yes we will" as Sen. Obama says, "Yes we can". It will be interesting to see the outcome of the work Sen. Clinton and if her negative tirade will motivate those who were on the Obama bandwagon to switch sides and vote for Sen. Clinton and her "clean" campaign.

Comment:
I appreciated your well informed post regarding the attack on Sen. Obama's foreign policy by Sen. McCain in an attempt to go on the offensive and attack the a large issue that is at the forefront of the 2008 Presidential election. I enjoy the way in which you show the comment by President Bush and Sen. McCain and rebut their comments not with your own words but with the words of Sen. Obama himself. I agree with your analysis of the situation when it comes to the way in which Sen. McCain and President Bush handled the situation in their attempt to solidify Sen. McCain's foreign policy when conversely compared to that of Sen. Obama. My thoughts however are that this kind of behavior can be harmful to the United States globally. Since Pakistan is one of our allies, I don't think that it plays favorably in the interest of the nation to accuse a possible Presidential candidate of attacking a country with which the United States is currently in good graces. I believe this kind of an attack goes beyond differentiating between the foreign policies of a few candidates who are vying for the Presidency. I think that it is hard to motivate a country to come together and vote for who they think will be the best leader for the country, when those leaders are bickering amongst each other over a few false statements that are made in order to bolster a campaign. Overall, I believe that the Presidential campaign is a time for the country to come together and in order for that to happen, I think that the candidates should be careful which parts of the campaign which they choose attack.

Endorsements: The Importance Of A Few Words

The support of Chuck Norris and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the smile of Oprah Winfrey, the songs of the Grateful Dead, are all examples of famous icons influencing the election process in whatever way they can. These endorsements have been crucial in the way the Presidential campaign has been run, and the outcome of the primaries thus far. The endorsement of Oprah Winfrey for Senator Barack Obama seemed to be a great asset to his campaign. In other words, Oprah’s decision to support Obama ultimately swayed thousands of female voters who might have otherwise voted for Hillary to do the same.

In order to understand what these endorsements truly mean to these candidates, it is necessary to observe the public and their views of those icons who endorse candidates. A Gallup poll conducted in October showed that "37 percent [of Americans] said endorsements from prominent Americans are a 'very' or 'somewhat' important factor in helping them decide on a candidate. Sixty-one percent said endorsements are of little or no importance to them." As candidates continue to drop out of the race because of a lack of funding or a lack of support, these endorsements have begun to play a much larger role in the Presidential race. The range of endorsements vary from celebrities to present day and former politicians. These endorsements generally seem to gain more importance as the Presidential race progresses. Without money or support presidential candidates stand little to no chance of winning the favor the public. Endorsements of particular importance are those of former candidates who are no longer in the Presidential campaign. There are examples of this currently happening amidst both the Republican and Democratic candidates; senators Obama and Clinton are vying for the endorsement of John Edwards, while Mitt Romney has chosen to endorse Senator McCain in the run for the White House.

An endorsement that held the attention of many was that of Senator Ted Kennedy and the daughter of John F. Kennedy,Caroline Kennedy, choosing to endorse Barack Obama. Senator Kennedy's decision to endorse Obama has made a large difference in the Obama campaign on a number of levels. Although Senator Kennedy does not have the best track record, the Kennedy name has always been revered in the United States and internationally. The Kennedy endorsements add a great deal to the Obama ticket because Obama has been referred to as the "New Kennedy." On the other hand, President Bush recently spoke out about the race for the Republican nomination and implicitly endorsed Senator McCain. According to President Bush, “the stakes in November are high. Prosperity and peace are in the balance. So with confidence in our vision and faith in our values, let us go forward, fight for victory and keep the White House in 2008." Although President Bush did not come out and explicitly endorse McCain, the choice words he uses to address his audience speak out for Senator McCain. This endorsement is interesting because President Bush and Senator McCain battled in 2000 quite seriously for the Republican nomination. This endorsement is one that is not very likely to hold much weight, as a result of the very low approval rating of President Bush at the moment across the United States.

Endorsements not only help to raise support for Presidential campaign but also help to raise monetary donations in order to keep the respective campaigns going. Monetary endorsements help to keep the campaigns of those in the Presidential race going. Campaign funds are becoming more and more important as time goes on. Senator Hillary Clinton is having trouble funding her own campaign. Last week, Senator Clinton was forced to loan her campaign 5 million dollars in order to keep it going. Contrarily, Senator Obama's grassroots campaign has helped to gather a large number of small contributions, which keep the campaign going strong monetarily. As the race for the overall nomination for each party becomes more intense and heated, monetary and spoken endorsements increase in number and in their importance.

The 2008 Presidential election has been one in which the American people have been very involved and endorsements have played a very large role in swaying the vote of the American public. The voters in America can be placed in two camps, one that scrutinizes the issues surrounding the election and educates themselves on the candidates respective stances on the issues prevalent in the election and the other that votes for the person whom they like the most. In the end, the true question is whether or not the American people will heed the words and support of these prominent people and vote for the candidate their favorite talk show host favors or if they will examine the policy issues and state of the economy at hand. A fusion of these two camps would ultimately be the best for the future of the United States. Time will tell if the stance taken by these icons in the United States will make a lasting impact on the 2008 Presidential election.