When Sneaks Attack
MSNBC is reporting what appears to be a singularly sneaky attack by a public employees union that is supporting Hillary Clinton but has sent out a direct mailing that appears to come from supporters of John Edwards. The mailing, from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) quotes Edwards but is on the record as supporting Clinton.
Here's the kicker, though: The piece quotes Edwards from a Sioux City Journal article in November saying that that "as many as 15 million Americans would be without coverage" under Obama's plan.
But, as it turns out, AFSCME is backing Clinton. In fact, even though Clinton and her campaign have been arguing for the past month that Obama's health-care plan doesn't insure everyone, Clinton's name isn't mentioned once on the flier. The Edwards quote makes it appear to be a slam by the Edwards team.
This tactic, it seems, could be intended to deflect the distaste that most voters have for direct attacks — even those that are policy based. But those in the know might think that this new negative mail is Iowa Nice playing a little dirty.
It isn't a little dirty. It is dirty. Period. They know that Clinton's negativity has rebounded and backfired on her, so they try to misdirect the backlash. This is likely to backfire even worse, though. Because both the Edwards and the Obama campaigns are very unlikely to let it pass without making sure people know who was really behind the attack - and who they are really backing.
Seriously, stupidly bad move. This will not play well in Iowa.
By Maggie, Thursday, 20 December , 2007 @ 2:00 pm
(Not so) UNBELIEVABLE!
Her campaign just keeps on locking and loading that proverbial gun and shooting Her Royal Commie in the foot.
HRC’s campaign minions … Doing the political (self)-destruction job so other campaigns don’t have to.
By NortonPete, Thursday, 20 December , 2007 @ 2:19 pm
I think I understood dirty politics better when it was a simple case of physically breaking into someone’s campaign headquarters to find out what they were up to.
That seemed more honest, kind of like a sneak football play.
Some of this spy vs spy stuff is a throw back to the old USSR propaganda days when they controlled the media ( I guess they still do ).
By martian, Thursday, 20 December , 2007 @ 3:07 pm
This reminds me of an old campaign trick. You make up some stickers that say “Vote For Bob Smith”, Bob Smith being your OPPONENT. You put the glue on the side with the writing on it, making sure this is very sticky glue so it’s hard to peel off, and then go out and glue them indiscriminately to CAR WINDSHIELDS on the driver’s side of the car so that when the driver gets into the car they are looking directly at this sticker that says “Vote For Bob Smith”. It’s obscuring the driver’s vision and, worse, it’s hard to scrape off. How ticked off do you think each and every one of those drivers will be at Bob Smith? Will any of them vote for him? Pure 100% misdirection because no one knows that the person pasting the sticker on the windshield is atually a supporter of the candidate running AGAINST Bob Smith.
The trick described in the article is no less dirty than this one. Worse, in fact, because it negatively impacts TWO of Hillary’s opponents - Obama because of what was said and Edwards for being the nasty guy who “went negative” against Obama. If it works, Hillary has harmed both of them while she comes up squeaky clean. Unfortunately for her, because they got caught, it just makes her look bad again and actually HELPS Edwards because he gets perceived as the “victim” in the ploy. Obama still comes out getting hurt, a little, because of what was said. So, Edwards is the winner in this mess.
By Mockin'bird, Thursday, 20 December , 2007 @ 4:42 pm
Chinese bundlers, campaign staff bunglers, and now public employees’ union…
every month there is another piece of gum stuck to Hillary’s Birkenstock.
By Mwalimu Daudi, Thursday, 20 December , 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Nixon is starting to look like a saint compared to Hilly the Hun…