January 2008 Archives

I know this blog is committed primarily to the importance of negative political campaigning and how it will effect this year’s presidential campaign.  However, I would be remiss if I didn’t have one entry here about the candidate who was not only my personal favorite entering 2008, but was also leading in the polls throughout 2007; Rudy Giuliani. 

The worst-run presidential campaign in the history of American politics?  Conventional wisdom says the answer to this question will be Hillary Clinton if she loses this year to Barak Obama.  Considering all that dough she raised, to have not had the brains to spend whatever was necessary in the caucus states to get [or pay off] bodies to show up on her behalf was indeed stupidity personified and arrogance of the highest order. 

But even if she loses, hers won’t be the worst-run presidential campaign in history; that honor will go to the 2008 presidential candidate who would have made by far the best president of all the 2008 candidates running; former New York Mayor Rudy Giulianai. 

What in the world was his campaign thinking?  Not campaigning in New Hampshire, a natural state for him? With all those independent voters and even Democrats who would have found him attractive?  His absence in Hew Hampshire left the field open to McCain by default, since McCain, like Giuliani, attracts those same Independents and Democrats, not to mention many Republicans. 

But McCain did not have Giuliani’s star power.  And despite his very presidential-quality resume, McCain didn’t have Giuliani’s incredible record of achievement either. 

Not only did Giuliani single-handedly take New York City from the dump it was before he became mayor  (if you don’t remember what the city was like pre-Giuliani, just watch 10 minutes of The French Connection or Death Wish to clearly see the graffiti-strewn piece of garbage that New York city one was); there was also Giuliani’s record as a federal prosecutor, where was a latter-day Elliot Ness.  Not only did Giuliani cripple the Mafia in new York City, but also broke the insider trading scandal [Michael Milken, Ivan Boesky, and company] that had it not been stopped would have led to a crash worse than 1929.  Not to mention putting away all those corrupt politicians, one of whom, former Queens borough President Donald Manes chose suicide [not once but twice] rather than having to face Giuliani in court

Can you believe the arrogance of Giuliani and his campaign believing he could simply sit it out until Florida?  Smugly believing that the rest of the GOP field would knock the shit out of each other so he could simply ride into Florida on his white horse to rescue the Republican Party?

I still can’t believe it.  No presidential candidate had excited me this much since Ronald Reagan in 1980.  So instead we have McCain by default.  Very reminiscent of Dole 1996.  The guy with the experience, the guy whose turn it was after having lost his previous try.  But unfortunately it could also be (like Dole) the guy with no vision, with no passion.

This far the only candidate with any real sense of vision appears to be Barack Obama [I can’t believe I’ve said it; actually saying something nice about a Democrat?]

The far left blog crooksandliars.com has reposted my interview with Deborah Solomon of the New York Times.  Although the excerpt seems fairly innocuous to me, the reaction from the blog's readers was, as you can see, somewhat less than erudite.  Below is a small sample:

• "The difference between a political hitman sleeping well and a person guilty of ethnic cleansing sleeping well is merely a matter of degree."
• "This piece of work needs to meet a real ‘hit man’."
• "Why doesn’t somebody do a political hitjob on Stephen Marks... he must also be destroyed."
• "I’ll bet that Hitler, Ida Amin, and Pol Pot all slept soundly as well"
• "It’s important to remember that the perpetrators of the Holocaust had few if any regrets."
• "One can only hope that some day he gets what is coming to him: AIDS."
• "[Marks'] actions DIRECTLY resulted in the Iraq war. His actions are INDISPENSABLE to the lying sack of shit Bushies and other lying sack of shit republicans. So, yes, he IS out murdering babies."
• "There is no corner in hell hot enough for this piece of garbage. Rot there you bastard, and soon. Eat shit and die."

Wow.  What to make of all this venom?   I should get AIDS?  I should be assassinated?  I'm murdering babies???  I'm being compared to Hitler and Pol Pot? 

First, remember that these are people who consider themselves liberals... those tolerant, warm and fuzzy, compassionate people. 

Second, someone needs to remind these people that without political opposition research, candidates for public office could say and do anything, and they'd get away with it!  Is that the kind of democracy we want?  I don't think so.  

And third, someone needs to remind John Amato, the blog's owner of his stated policy regarding reader comments.  Namely, "Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog’s host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments" and "Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter...will not be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter’s ISP address"

But in the midst of all the overwrought vitriol, there was one sensible comment.  

"I think he should be thanked for finding and disclosing the information"

You're welcome.

Folks, here’s what happened in South Carolina and why Obama crushed Hillary: All the polls leading into Saturday had Obama leading Hillary by 4-6 points, with Hillary capturing 90%of the white vote.  In the end, Obama did much better than expected because most polls only poll what they refer to as “likely voters”, meaning voters who have voted in the past 3 elections.  These polls did not pick up all the young voters that had never before voted who were energized by Obama, many of them white. 

Polls likewise underestimated young and first-time voters in Jesse Ventura’s 1998 victory [which no poll showed him winning], as well as badly underestimated Ross Perot’s eventual 19% of the vote in 1992 for the same reason.

The negative attacks against Obama by the Clintons, as well as Hillary’s ability to drag Obama into a pissing match during the debate may have been effective in bringing down Obama’s support among white voters.  However, the Clintons hadn’t counted on the young white voters who had never before voted, and had no emotional ties to Bill Clinton, as most white Democratic voters did. 

Bill Clinton’s response to the crushing 2-1 defeat “No big deal, Jesse Jackson won South Carolina too” is another attempt to marginalize Obama as another typical “black” politician [in this case Jesse Jackson, who still remains very unpopular with white voters].  As a result of this quote, expect the Clintons to dig further into the gutter with more personal attacks against Oasma  regarding Obama’s controversial church, some of his questionable business dealings, and some of his bizarre votes in the Illinois state legislature.

Hi. I'm Stephen Marks,  author of "Confessions  of a Political Hitman" and welcome to my new blog.  I will be discussing the effect of negative campaigning during the 2008 presidential election, with updates several times per week discussung which negative attacks are working, which are not, and why. . 

Thus far the negative attacks have not worked very well, as the attacks against Huckabee in Iowa backfired, as did the attacks against John McCain in South Carolina.  However, stay tuned as the Hillary-Obama race will soon get nasty, followed by the same for the Republican candidates on Super Tuesday

Also stay tuned for what negative attacks have NOT YET COME OUT; which bombs have yet to be dropped. 

Feel free to join my blog whether you agree with me or not.  All opinions are welcome and will be printed here.   I will add new analysis each night regarding the 2008 presidential campaign

Thanks,
Stephen Marks