Thursday, October 16, 2008

Atkins/Clark campaign goes negative. Man I hate that.

I heard a radio ad for the Atkins/Clark campaign that was very negative against the Endert/Jager campaigns. The later was identified as a collaborative effort and attacked as such, when people in the know realize that is not true. I just don't agree with campaigns focusing on the others weaknesses and not just focusing on what they can bring positive to the council. And the Atkins/Clark ticket has many strengths. I don't think they needed to stoop to this. Just my opinion.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Y'know Richard

It's not a big surprise. I do think that some interesting, positive ideas have come out of this campaign. Growing local businesses is a key element. Not a full blown solution but a part of a complex solution.

But, if you look at it, what has George or Linda contributed to the community before the campaign? Volunteered on any non-profit boards or fund raising efforts? nope. Relay for Life? Big Bros & Sisters, Boy's & Girls Club? nope. Even worked with Larry on any of the west side crime, drug, homeless and traffic issues? nope. Worked on party efforts to improve things. nope. Worked on energy conservation, transient issues or tourism promotion with Polly? nope. Or promoting the Zoo, the energy authority or a skate park with Jeff? nope. They really have few if any contributions of their own.

I was also offended by the latest mailer.

They want us to think that their opponents are somehow responsible for the public discontent with government across the board.

They're feeding on that discontent because, they have no solutions or records or accomplishments of their own.

It's not uncommon when you can't raise yourself up for some to attempt to bring down the other guy



So the natural approach is to take pot shots at the other guy and

Anonymous said...

Campaign rule #1
Go negative if you're behind in the polls.

Campaign rule #2
Go negative if have have nothing positive to say about yourself.

Campaign rule #3
Go negative if your name is Bonnie Neely (or if Bonnie Neely and/or Richard Salzman are involved with your campaign).

Anonymous said...

Salzman like for sure. Progressive for sure. Weak for sure.

Anonymous said...

I gotta say the '04 and '06 campaigns were handled very well by these people. It is disturbing to see what is going on now in '08. Where did all the energy from '04 go? Did they learn nothing from '06? Even though this is a Democratic year, I fully anticipate the Endert/Jager slate to win.

What happened!?!

Anonymous said...

Richard, you know, they've adopted something closer to your message and your style of campaigning than any other local Democrats in recent history. I agree they've gone too negative recently, but up until these ads I thought the edginess was working for them. It was reminding me of some of your past electoral crusades.

bull moose said...

If you follow political discourse on the national level, pointing out your opponents' weaknesses and track record is not considered negative. So I don't see the Clark/Atkins ads or mailer as negative.

Rob Arkley, who has a Jager sign in front of his house, engaged in a clandestine mud-slinging fest at Chris Kerrigan in 2004. He didn't have the balls to sign his name to it.

In 2006 the campaign of Virginia Bass, whose husband is running Jager's campaign, engaged in a phone-banking slur campaign of Peter La Vallee.

Clark and Atkins aren't using sleazy tactics to point out their opponents' downside. They are upfront about it.

Anonymous said...

Richard.

In response to Bull Moose. Didn't you make calls for Virginia? What slurs is he talking about? I don't remember any negative campaigning in that race.

Anonymous said...

Frank Jager cares about workers?

Yeah right. He is as right wing as you can get. He is completely opposed to any union. Don't you get it, Richard?

Please stop and think.

Anonymous said...

7:43 get your facts straight.

Jager is a past president of the EPOA. A union.

Anonymous said...

Whats up with the sale of the pulp mill? Can anyone give any information. Lee and Mann has a Discloseable Transaction on their website. I believe they sold their US and Hong Kong assets.

samoasoftball said...

Bull Moose: Virginia's campaign did not use a slur campaign. That is just a lie.

Anonymous said...

"Rob Arkley, who has a Jager sign in front of his house, engaged in a clandestine mud-slinging fest at Chris Kerrigan in 2004. He didn't have the balls to sign his name to it."

Again, Bullshit.

There is just as much speculation out there that it was a Salzman move to sling mud at their candidate, while at the same time calling foul.

bull moose said...

Richard, I have no doubt that you weren't aware of such a slur campaign. You wouldn't have tolerated it had you known about it. That's one of your better qualities.

Anonymous said...

As soon as Clark announced he was running the right wing scumbags in this town were out in force talking about his "nutty" letters.

You put it right in the gutter as usual.

You reichwingers are so hypocritical.

Anonymous said...

Bull Moose = Bull S**t.

If this slur campaign had really occured do you think for a moment it wouldn't have come out at the time on Captain Buhne? or Heraldo?
It never did.

Richard was in the thick of things during Virginia's campaign and it is an huge insult to him to assert he was so out of touch he wouldn't have known.

Anonymous said...

"As soon as Clark announced he was running the right wing scumbags in this town were out in force talking about his "nutty" letters"

Hey douchebag,

Clark WROTE THE LETTERS. He signed his name - the letters are lunatic fringe AT BEST.

Are you trying to say his anti HSU RANTS have merit? Pulllleeeze.

Anonymous said...

To continue Douchebag,

Are you inferring that Clark should not be held accountable for the nutty things that he wrote? That somehow he should get a pass?

Those monthly rants were priceless. I looked forward to reading them, they made me smile at the sheer wack-a-lunity of it all.

Anonymous said...

Do you think that Jager shouldn't be called to account for his failures as a public employee?

Anonymous said...

Hmmm. Welll at least you admit the personal nature of your attacks on George Clark. And you admit that your campaign went there first, Mr. Jager.

Your use of the word "douchbag" speaks volumes of the Jager campaign's view of women and propensity townards thuggery.

mresquan said...

"Rob Arkley, who has a Jager sign in front of his house, engaged in a clandestine mud-slinging fest at Chris Kerrigan in 2004. He didn't have the balls to sign his name to it."

Again, Bullshit."

Well Wayne Ordos seemed to be the one willing to take credit for it,regardless of if he actually funded the Coalition For Jobs or not.

Anonymous said...

I gotta say the '04 and '06 campaigns were handled very well by these people. It is disturbing to see what is going on now in '08. Where did all the energy from '04 go? Did they learn nothing from '06? Even though this is a Democratic year, I fully anticipate the Endert/Jager slate to win.

What happened!?!


Are you kidding? 2006 was a disaster, the Dems lost the Mayor seat and two of three Council seat, with Larry Glass the only winner, and that was only because Mary Beth was getting fairly Alzheimery.

At least Clark/Atkins are keeping the Loco Solutions control freaks and their David Cobb/Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap puppet string pullers well away from their campaigns. They're better off without the DUHC freaks.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Douchebag,

Obviously I am either closely affiliated with the Jager campaign, or barring that, Jager himself.

Riiiiight...douchebag.

Anonymous said...

So finally someone tells me that this George Clark is THE George Clark. The writer of crazy letters to the editor. The gooftiest of the Goofty. The laughingstock of all thinking beings for four counties in every direction but West!

Why wasn't this fact made clear at the beginning of the campaign?

Iron said...

ClarkAtkins campaign is now lying, yes, Lying. Flat out lying, twisting truths, and spin. It only shines a brighter light on their opponents' clean campaigns. Linda has even come on Heraldo's blog and admitted lying about Polly: "I did connect the Endert campaign with the attack about the sham $500 limit when she isn't a part of that. I...made a mistake.", but they continue to lie anyway. Sad. Linda would actually have a good chance if she ran her own campaign and raised her own $$. Linda and George never garnered any appeal with the public, so it's time to spew venom as they see their effort slipping away. I'm sure the gutless Kerrigan can hardly look Polly Endert in the face as he knows his campaign is flat out lying about his councilmate. But then, little Chrissie was never a team player to begin with- what a shameless little boy. George will never hold public office, but Linda, with the right handling and a clean campaign, could. I'll bet she learns from this huge mistake of aligning herself with George and all the sour grapes that have gone with it. George and Linda have run a bungled campaign and they paid a lot of $$ for their "advisors". What a joke. Endert and Jager used an all local effort and didn't pay for advice from out-of-state. Looks like Endert and Jager in '08. This one's done

Anonymous said...

All lying sacks of shit.

Anonymous said...

Jager's only supporter in this town is Rob Arkley.

That's enough to disqualify him right there.

Anonymous said...

"Jager's only supporter in this town is Rob Arkley.

That's enough to disqualify him right there.

8:31 AM"

Wow 831, did you come up with that one all on your own? LmSao.

We'll see on the fourth.