As a blog posted as part of a Truman State University class, we cannot ignore a look at the former Truman professor, now Democratic incumbent for the Missouri State Representative, Rebecca McClanahan.
McClanahan has stated multiple times that she will always run a 100% positive campaign and refrain from negative ads directed toward her opponents. It has seemed to work well for her. Instead of ads directed at insulting other candidates, her ads are focused on reasons why you should vote for her, not reasons why you shouldn't vote for her opponent. A popular ad by her in the previous election is a good example:
With the upcoming ads we expect for the coming elections, will she be as focused on her positive campaign? Has she been 100% positive on all her advertisements before? When her opponent began negative ads directed toward her she put up the following ad:
Personally, the advertisement was a great way to counter the negative pressure she was receiving without seeming like she was breaking her promise to being positive. However, the ad did seem to imply that her opponent was being untruthful in his accusations and the beginning humor with the man saying that she loves puppies in a negative tone made the implication that her opponent was saying ridiculous things.
While this was a much more positive way for McClanahan to respond and possibly the best way to react rather than ignoring the negative ads against her, it can't be considered 100% positive. Additionally, her implications that her opponent was saying things as ridiculous as it being negative to love puppies is a bit exaggerated.
A well played ad? Definitely. (After all, she is from Truman.)
100% positive and completely spin-free? Not quite OR maybe she is just defending herself by criticizing her opponent for attacking her.
Sure, the ads that McClanahan's campaign organization are "100% Positive," but what about the ads from third party organizations? Are all of those completely positive? If they're not completely positive, why hasn't McClanahan "pulled the plug" on them?
ReplyDeleteAnd what ads would those be?
ReplyDeleteIs there a difference between being negative and defending yourself?
ReplyDeleteTo Michael: Have you seen any negative advertisements toward Zachary Wyatt? If so, I would love to take a look at them!
ReplyDeleteTo Abi: There is if she is using the excuse of defending herself to break her promise of 100% positive. But she seems to be mainly just defending herself here. The "loves puppy" comment could be taken as negative sarcasm, but we feel its more humorous and catchy.