Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (18301)	11/27/2007 3:44:13 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Respond to of 224759

Dick Morris knows the Hill/Bill mud-throwing machine is about to move into high gear: >HOW HILLARY WILL GO NEGATIVE November 27, 2007--dickmorris.com -- AS her once-formidable lead in national polls dwindles and Barack Obama moves ahead of her in the all-important Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Hillary Clinton will likely intensify her negative campaign against her rivals. The Clintons' political MO has always had a good dose of negative campaigning, especially when the going gets rough. There's no reason to assume that they will alter their game plan now. I remember Bill's race for re-election as Arkansas governor back in 1990, when he found himself falling behind Hal McCrae, his unknown Democratic primary opponent. After Clinton's 10 years as governor, McCrae's attacks - featuring Daliesque stretched-out clocks tolling the time for him to go - were hitting home. Hillary decided to attend McCrae's next press conference and engage him in a public, impromptu debate about his attacks on her husband. She gave as good as she got - and her foray marked the start of a four-week campaign of negative ads that brought McCrae down. The Clintons used negative ads and attacks in each gubernatorial campaign - and, of course, in Bill's two races for president. Until now, the '08 Democratic contest has been a referendum on Hillary: The basic decision facing voters has been: Would you vote for her? The Clintons need to get people thinking about whether they like her rivals any better. Negative ads would do the trick - but at a price: By attacking an opponent, they'd concede that Hillary isn't inevitable. That would give Obama (or John Edwards, should they decide to aim at him instead) added credibility - and perhaps more access to funding and contributions. Historically, such considerations have never deterred the Clintons - who are always ones to anticipate their adversaries' strength rather than to belittle it. How will they do it?<