Both U.S. candidates were asked about the increasing negative tone in their race after our KY3 debate. Democrat Claire McCaskill pledged to take the campaign to a higher level while Sen. Jim Talent accused McCaskill of attacking and said his points are relevant observations about her record.
The following is a bunch of different excerpts from both candidates on the issue of what's negative, what is fair game and the overall tone of the campaign:
McCaskill: I can't express how hard it is when your family is attacked and when you are attacked on a personal level. That's hard. Weathering those attacks and trying to stay above it is a challenge and so I was able to stay above it and not get down there and roll around in the mud, and I do think it is sad. Somebody asked me before the campaign started if Jim Talent would ever approve the kind of ads, what things they are saying now and I said it wouldn't happen. I'm a bit surprised that Jim Talent has approved these ads. That's not the Jim Talent I knew when I served with him in Jefferson City and I think it's sad.
Talent: I really don't think [there is negativity] on my part. I am just pointing out problems in her record. I've not said she's surrounded by scandal. That's what she said about me. I just pointed out issues with her record. Let the voters draw the conclusions they want. I do talk about what's relevant, my record, what my opponent wants to do, her views, and her record. And that's what we're going to continue to talk about.
McCaskill: We have talked about Senator Talent's voting record and that's all we're going to talk about is Senator Talent's voting record. Our ad has pointed out his voting record. But we're not going to call him names.
I am concerned about the tone. It is a concern. I think you are going to see a change in tone from our campaign as a result. I'm tired of it and I think voters are tired of it. The problem is when they start coming after you, especially your character, it's very hard to be successful. I didn't do this in the Governor's race when this stuff started. I didn't go there and it had a different ending than I wanted. It's really one of those difficult decisions. Do you try to point out the problems with Sen. Talent record or do you just talk about your positive vision and agenda? I do think it is important to change the tone and I think it is really important to motivate people. I don't think Missourians are confident Jim Talent is in a position to make change. I have a number of issues I'd side with Republicans on, some I'd fight my party on. That's what we need in Washington, not somebody who is going to rubber stamp the party 94% of the time.
Talent: I get a lot of enthusiasm as I go around the state. I've spent a lot of the time telling people what I've done for Missouri and what I want to do. If you watch the St. Louis debate, I repeated over and over again, because it is a record I am proud of. High impact legislation, that really is going to make a difference for decades. I think the contrast with my opponent is relevant. That's how you run a campaign. It's about choices.
The meth bill, the energy bill, the predatory lending bill. When I passed these things, most of which were unanimous or strongly supported on both sides of the aisle, she turned out and attacked them, and attacked me.
I've not said anything about what she's done. I am going to talk about the differences between us.
McCaskill: Senator Talent and his friends at the Chamber of Commerce, Progress for America, all the different groups they spent close to $10 million dollars in a state that elected President Bush by a wide margin and very few polls show him at or above 45. I think unfortunately they've decided, they are not going to elect Senator Talent, they are just going to try to disqualify me. And I think you are going to see the nastiest stuff this state has ever seen in the next three weeks. I'm not looking forward to it, but I hope I'm tough enough to stand up and get through it. I'm going to tell my family to quit watching TV but it is clear to me when I heard the tact Senator Talent took in his opening statement tonight, not talking about his views, but going after my personal character, that's a preview I think of what you are going to see. I think they are concerned that if they can fool Missourians about my character, they can re-elect Senator Talent and I think it's a bad way to win an election.
The back and forth sniping between the two candidates leads to this question: What is really negative and dirty and what is just hardball politics but relevant?
*Is it NEGATIVE for Sen. Talent's campaign to demand proof from a veteran about a powerful claim in a TV ad?
*Is it NEGATIVE for Sen. Talent's campaign to demand McCaskill release her husbands tax returns?
*Is it NEGATIVE for McCaskill to call Talent a 'false patriot' by calling into question his votes on veterans issues?
*Is it NEGATIVE for Sen. Talent to approve a message from a veteran calling McCaskill 'a liar and a cheat.?'
Is it NEGATIVE or just painfully RELEVANT? Where's the line . . . and who decides.
No comments:
Post a Comment