2016 Postmortem

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)

19. Anytime you draw contrast you are saying one is right and the other is wrong.

Reply to dsc (Reply #17)

Thu Jan 14, 2016, 05:59 PM

Jan 2016

That is not the same as going negative.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

99 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Chuckie Toad laughing out loud at Hillary's claim that Bernie ran a negative ad. [View all] Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 OP

I wonder if Larry Wilmore will do another skit tonight with the "intern" from the Clinton campaign. winter is coming Jan 2016 #1

I haven't seen it. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #4

If you are Mrs. Wall Street then it would appear -ve Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #36

Todd is paid by right coporation media: Hillary has turned him down often lewebley3 Jan 2016 #66

A negative ad is any ad that attacks an opponent Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #2

Doesn't even mention her name in the ad. Punkingal Jan 2016 #6

The implication in the ad is pretty clear IMO. He mentions "two visions" Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #8

Simply drawing contrast, not an attack. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #9

I think if he said that Lokijohn Jan 2016 #74

It would also be factual. eom Fawke Em Jan 2016 #96

If Hillary supporters are desperate and as nervous as everyone in Hillary's campaign INdemo Jan 2016 #29

An ad which says HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #32

Some might argue? Kall Jan 2016 #77

Is that untrue? About the millions from banks? Matariki Jan 2016 #47

Oh? Hillary's "vision" is so accurately described that you can easily tell? Scootaloo Jan 2016 #82

Well pointing out the truth about humbled_opinion Jan 2016 #84

So how would you characterize her position regarding Wall Street? libdem4life Jan 2016 #88

It just describes two visions shawn703 Jan 2016 #92

No, he says there are two visions. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #7

He's attacking Hillary's "vision" Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #10

Drawing contrast, not attacking. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #11

The ad implies she's in the pocket of big banks: Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #13

No way this is a negative ad. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #18

You can keep saying that it's not a negative ad Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #20

Then why is that claim being laughed at? You can keep saying it is, but it isn't. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #21

Chuckles Toad is laughing.... Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #25

Bernie supporters are using HIM as a support murielm99 Jan 2016 #44

They use the corporate-controlled MSM when it suits their objectives Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #46

Because even he is bailing on h. nt artislife Jan 2016 #63

Oh, my. None Bernie supporters are citing. chuckles. What a hoot. riversedge Jan 2016 #64

Just as you can keep saying the facts are 'negative' Matariki Jan 2016 #49

The ad goes after Hillary Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #53

Just keep repeating that. Someone might believe it Matariki Jan 2016 #54

Now you're making this about me. Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #55

lol Matariki Jan 2016 #56

Hillary's gun ad is closely analogous. Is that negative? cali Jan 2016 #73

Because you present your opinion as a fact. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #94

I believe it is negative. Something Sanders said he would not do. riversedge Jan 2016 #65

Wow! That desperation spreads FAST! Plucketeer Jan 2016 #68

Did Clinton not take campaign money from banks? Matariki Jan 2016 #69

Laughable. It's about as mild as you can get. cali Jan 2016 #76

Because you're a supporter. Fawke Em Jan 2016 #98

Nope. Took a poll. 0% agree with you. Yes, it was an Internet poll. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #83

As a shaky Hillary supporter persuadable Jan 2016 #91

Nearly everyone is saying it's not a negative ad. Fawke Em Jan 2016 #97

Seems more like an awareness than a judgment. nt artislife Jan 2016 #24

Isn't she? Matariki Jan 2016 #59

So then the implication.... Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #60

You are nitpicking Matariki Jan 2016 #62

well if hc wasn't taking all that big bank money she wouldn't have to worry questionseverything Jan 2016 #86

No, Lokijohn Jan 2016 #95

She doesn't have a vision...she is a pragmatist. Ask Howard Dean. Punkingal Jan 2016 #12

+1 n/t Bjornsdotter Jan 2016 #33

Here is the ad. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #14

It points out facts related to Hillary mindwalker_i Jan 2016 #50

Facts related to Hillary and others Mnpaul Jan 2016 #61

OMG - they're calling *that* negative? Matariki Jan 2016 #51

it's the "lively debate" she asked for tk2kewl Jan 2016 #15

By your definition, then... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #27

It's good to know you think Hillary's vision for the United States is wrong. Kalidurga Jan 2016 #57

Than Hillary's gun ad is negative. cali Jan 2016 #71

negative doesn't mean false dsc Jan 2016 #17

Anytime you draw contrast you are saying one is right and the other is wrong. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #19

Nuance is hard for them...lol artislife Jan 2016 #26

Not the same as an attack anyway bjobotts Jan 2016 #85

No, it's not. But think what you need to; it doesn't matter. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #42

NO. it compares their two positions. pangaia Jan 2016 #28

Lol and bullshit. He compares two approaches. cali Jan 2016 #48

A negative ad is anything that talks about Hillary factually mindwalker_i Jan 2016 #58

Stating a person's position is not an attack. bjobotts Jan 2016 #80

Saw it....they WERE laughing at her campaign. Amazing! Punkingal Jan 2016 #3

Telling the truth about her is a "negative" "attack" now, apparently. arcane1 Jan 2016 #5

How will Hillary handle an ad from a Republican if she melts down over Bernie's ads stillwaiting Jan 2016 #16

You want an attack ad? catnhatnh Jan 2016 #22

Asking you to fasten your seatbelt for landing ybbor Jan 2016 #72

Now they love the corporate media! Metric System Jan 2016 #23

No--- THEY ( WE/ME) still hate the corporate media. pangaia Jan 2016 #30

Toad is far right wing CorkySt.Clair Jan 2016 #31

So far it seems madokie Jan 2016 #34

I love when they call Bull Shit on Hillary's Campaign's Bull Shit. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #40

I thought the ad Bjornsdotter Jan 2016 #35

So what was negative about it? Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #37

Her spokesperson was claiming that drawing contrast = attack. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #38

They are awfully sensitive all of a sudden! Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #41

The next person on the show said that spokesperson was "desperate". Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #43

There was nothing negative about it. The Clinton campaign must be planning on going winter is coming Jan 2016 #67

+1 I think you nailed it hueymahl Jan 2016 #90

Exactly my thinking. n/t JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #93

So ejbr Jan 2016 #39

I wish I could rec that. Thanks.. Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #45

Yeah ejbr Jan 2016 #52

For Toad, it's more like two times a year. winter is coming Jan 2016 #70

You can even ignore him on this one... ejbr Jan 2016 #75

She is indeed predictable. SoapBox Jan 2016 #78

Does anyone have a link or show title. SamKnause Jan 2016 #79

Here's a list of her top donors Matariki Jan 2016 #81

To Hillary and her minions, anything that highlights her "say and do anything to get elected" Feeling the Bern Jan 2016 #87

Hillary Anxious to Go Negative on Bernie gordyfl Jan 2016 #89

I wonder if that's why Chelsea lied about Sanders and single payer the other day. winter is coming Jan 2016 #99