Nasty Campaign Ad Spending Beats Nice 10:1

Dondrei

Diabloii.Net Member
Nasty Campaign Ad Spending Beats Nice 10:1

You know what I saw on the news the other day? Apparently grass is green. True story.

*EDIT*

Holy forum screwups, Batman!
 

Road Ratt

Diabloii.Net Member
Nasty Campaign Ad Spending Beats Nice 10:1

(AP) So far this campaign, the political parties have exposed voters to nearly $160 million in ads attacking congressional candidates. How much spent painting a positive image? About $17 million.

That's just over $1 of nice for every $10 of nasty.

The message ingrained in such a disparity in numbers: Don't vote for a candidate; vote against the opponent.

Negative ads are the coin of the realm in politics. With one week left in the campaign, voters will continue to be bombarded on television, in the mail and over the phone as political strategists make their closing arguments to a shrinking pool of those who haven't made up their minds.

Under the terms of a 2002 campaign finance law, these messages are independent expenditures that the parties can undertake only if they do not coordinate with the candidates they are seeking to help. This type of spending by the parties on congressional campaigns is 54 percent higher than it was for the same period in the 2004 campaign season, according to data compiled by the Federal Election Commission.

It is also decidedly more negative. In 2004, the parties spent about $6 on ads in favor of congressional candidates for every $5 spent opposing candidates.

Source

I thought that this campaign season seemed a little nastier than usual. Is it any wonder that people are disillusioned by politics?
 

Dondrei

Diabloii.Net Member
That's one expensive bride. I guess that's why people generally get them from Russia.
 

DurfBarian

Diabloii.Net Member
They would be more pleased if we had just given them each a million-dollar yacht to travel between the island and the mainland. Would have been cheaper too.
 
Top