nicky10013 Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Prove it. Considering you haven't posted any of your own, trying to throw the research onus onto me is hilarous and desperate. Quote
nicky10013 Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 No, don't buy it. We vote as often or more (certainly more) than the US. Frequency of elections is not relevant. The turn out in the 2008 election was 56%+ The turn out in the 2004 election was 53%+ In Canada however....the 2008 election was 58+% and the 2006 was 64%+ Not a striking difference but this in no way proves your point. Not so much of a difference that it would have any bearing on the effectiveness of political advertizing. According to you...with absolutely no proof. Elizabeth May knows they work...so well in fact should would pass a low to curb the freedom of expression and ban them.http://www.elizabethmay.ca/in-the-news/island-tides/a-prescription-for-a-healthier-democracy-ban-political-tv-advertising-2/ She's just as much an idiot as the morons who run these things. Quote
Shady Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Considering you haven't posted any of your own, trying to throw the research onus onto me is hilarous and desperate. Actually I have. I linked to an NPR study asserting that political attack ads do have an effect. However, you've done nothing to back up your premise. Quote
Shakeyhands Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 According to the globe....they are running now. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/liberals-strike-back-with-ads-on-fighter-jets-corporate-tax-cuts/article1878341/ k, so I watched both ads. They seem to be attacking policy not Harper personally. I don't think that either are what anyone would deem an attack ad, am I incorrect? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
jbg Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 That best thing for the libs is a harper majority so for once the libs will have four years to gut the party of all the old back room boys and the old chreteinites and martinites and rebuild that party with new young canadians with fresh ideas, yes I am a con, but I believe in 2 strong parties that respect canadian law and culture for canadians to pick to who can lead the country. I don't think Canada has really had a two-party system since before the Borden coalition. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Sorry Shakey, Ignatieff does not sound like an English-Canadian. And he's certainly not a French-Canadian. So, what is he?Either a political tourist or denizen of Hahvahd. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Molly Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) According to the globe....they are running now. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/liberals-strike-back-with-ads-on-fighter-jets-corporate-tax-cuts/article1878341/ While that writer doesn't seem to understand what an attack ad is, this one gets it: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/jeffrey-simpson/attack-the-policies-not-the-person/article1879272/ There’s not a word in the attack ad against Mr. Ignatieff or the one directed at NDP leader Jack Layton concerning their policies or ideas. Politics, if you follow the twisted logic behind the ads, is all about personalities; and political argumentation is apparently all about tearing down the motivations and personalities of opponents. This twisted logic makes the ads so thoroughly appalling. To say that a politician is ambitious, and should be scorned as such, is like mocking an athlete because he or she wants to win the game, or a business person because he or she wishes to make a profit Is Mr. Harper himself without political ambition? After all, apart from a few short years out of politics in Calgary, he’s been around or in politics all his adult life. It would be demeaning toward Mr. Harper to say, as he now alleges about Mr. Ignatieff, that everything he does is driven by personal ambition. When a politician so lowers the tone of discourse to impugn his opponents’ motivations and backgrounds, how does that politician expect the broad public to have any respect for the accuser, the political process and all those who work there. If anything, the attack ads reveal much more about the attacker than the attacked. No wonder all parties struggle to attract people of great quality to politics, since who would want to be depicted as the Conservative attack machine does about two highly intelligent, committed men such as Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Layton? You can disagree with both of them on issues or ideology; you can criticize their sense of the public interest; you can dislike their parties; but they are both honourable men who, as a matter of public record, accomplished more outside politics (Mr. Ignatieff as a writer, broadcaster and public intellectual of international renown; Mr. Layton as an academic and head of the Canadian Federation of Municipalities) than Mr. Harper did. What attack ads do, therefore, is degrade discourse and turn all but the sharpest partisan into someone revolted by the entire world of politics. The Liberals began running hard-hitting television ads Friday, but at least they stuck to issues, not personalities. We, as citizens, might hope for political leaders who inspire, or at the very least act as we would wish to act ourselves, with some measure of civility and mutual respect. (Emphasis is mine.) Edited January 22, 2011 by Molly Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
Wild Bill Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) When a politician so lowers the tone of discourse to impugn his opponents’ motivations and backgrounds, how does that politician expect the broad public to have any respect for the accuser, the political process and all those who work there. If anything, the attack ads reveal much more about the attacker than the attacked. No wonder all parties struggle to attract people of great quality to politics, since who would want to be depicted as the Conservative attack machine does about two highly intelligent, committed men such as Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Layton? What attack ads do, therefore, is degrade discourse and turn all but the sharpest partisan into someone revolted by the entire world of politics. The Liberals began running hard-hitting television ads Friday, but at least they stuck to issues, not personalities. We, as citizens, might hope for political leaders who inspire, or at the very least act as we would wish to act ourselves, with some measure of civility and mutual respect. [/i] (Emphasis is mine.) I'm with you, Molly. I know that there's some evidence that they work but the fact that that they work doesn't mean they SHOULD be used! I also remember how the Liberals used the tactics first against the Reform Party, not always with actual ads but certainly with very effective "whisper campaigns". I mean, there's no way so much negative stereotyping of the typical Reformer could have arisen on its own! The hand of a Warren Kinsella type seems obvious. Yet to me, it still doesn't matter. Such ads seem mean-spirited, rude and low-brow! I just don't like them, from any party. Somebody should take the "high road" and I would hope Canadians would reward them for it. Edited January 22, 2011 by Wild Bill Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Molly Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 I'm with you, Molly. .... Such ads seem mean-spirited, rude and low-brow! I just don't like them, from any party. Somebody should take the "high road" and I would hope Canadians would reward them for it. The words are those of Jeffery Simpson, not mine. It's a fine rant, spot on, deserving of a salute, and a resounding, "Hear, hear!" Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
Scotty Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 "Well, the Liberals did it too!" Is this really an excuse? It's an explanation. The Liberals have been doing it for years against them. Why such indignation that they do the same in response? Do you feel similarly indignant that the Liberals have no rolled out their own attack ads? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 Can you point out a few examples of Liberal attack ads? I, for the life of me, can't recall any. Thanks appreciate it, I may be seeing this issue in a onesided manner. I would if there was any way to do so, but so far as I'm aware there is no facility which stores ads from previous election campaigns, particularly campaigns from ten and fifteen years back. I think most of us of a certain age remember the "scary scary" campaigns the Liberals launched against the Reformers, though. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 k, so I watched both ads. They seem to be attacking policy not Harper personally. I don't think that either are what anyone would deem an attack ad, am I incorrect? Yes. An attack ad is just that. Rather than touting your own platform, policies, ideas or candidate, you attack the other guy's platform, policies, ides or candidates. You don't say your policy will save the country, but that the other guys policy will destroy it. The Liberal campaign and advertising against the PCs 7cent gasoline tax would be an example. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
punked Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) Liberals have all kinds of attack ads. My favorite is the soldiers in our streets ads. Another great one is the 2004 ad which starts out with "Stephen Harper would have sent our troops to Iraq," If that disqualifies you from being PM then I guess all the Liberals would be voting for Jack this election. Funny how the Liberals flip flop over only 6 years. Edited January 22, 2011 by punked Quote
Evening Star Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 I'm not a fan of the current Liberals at all but tbf they never flip-flopped on Iraq. Quote
nicky10013 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) It's an explanation. The Liberals have been doing it for years against them. Why such indignation that they do the same in response? Do you feel similarly indignant that the Liberals have no rolled out their own attack ads? No, it's not an explanation. Especially considering the fact that the CPC came to power promising a newer and more open style of politics. Instead, every time they've acted like previous Liberal governments, all we get is "oh, well the Liberals did it first." Considering they ran on NOT BEING LIBERALS, can't you see what pile of horse shit non-explanation for what it is? I don't disagree that the Liberals have been doing it for years and I've never liked it. I'd say the new ads are negative but to call them attack ads is a little much. They're not drive by smears of Harper's personality as has been done in the past. They focus on his policy agenda. I don't think they should do it period but then again they don't listen to me. Edited January 22, 2011 by nicky10013 Quote
nicky10013 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 Actually I have. I linked to an NPR study asserting that political attack ads do have an effect. However, you've done nothing to back up your premise. No you haven't. I claimed they didn't work in Canada. Pulling out stats from the US is completely different. Quote
Molly Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 Liberals have all kinds of attack ads. My favorite is the soldiers in our streets ads. Another great one is the 2004 ad which starts out with "Stephen Harper would have sent our troops to Iraq," If that one is an 'attack ad', then so are all the ads in which the Conservatives describe their own policy. Let's see... it says the Conservatives would have sent troops to Iraq, want to spend billions of dollars on tanks and aircraft carriers; weaken gun laws; scrap the Kyoto accord, sacrifice Canadian healthcare for US style tax cuts; not protect a woman's right to choose. and that Stepehn Harper was prepared to work with he BQ. Are you sure they weren't just reading verbatim from the Con website? Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
punked Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 If that one is an 'attack ad', then so are all the ads in which the Conservatives describe their own policy. Let's see... it says the Conservatives would have sent troops to Iraq, want to spend billions of dollars on tanks and aircraft carriers; weaken gun laws; scrap the Kyoto accord, sacrifice Canadian healthcare for US style tax cuts; not protect a woman's right to choose. and that Stepehn Harper was prepared to work with he BQ. Are you sure they weren't just reading verbatim from the Con website? All Iggy's positions by the way! Quote
Shakeyhands Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 Yes. An attack ad is just that. Rather than touting your own platform, policies, ideas or candidate, you attack the other guy's platform, policies, ides or candidates. You don't say your policy will save the country, but that the other guys policy will destroy it. The Liberal campaign and advertising against the PCs 7cent gasoline tax would be an example. There's a difference in attacking policy and attacking someone specific. I find absolutely nothing wrong with attacking policy. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Argus Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 (edited) del Edited January 23, 2011 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Shady Posted January 23, 2011 Report Posted January 23, 2011 I claimed they didn't work in Canada. What evidence do you base this on? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.