It is one thing to hit your opponent hard. It is another to come off as a nutty Tea Partier. I can't stand Daniel Webster. I have no problem with Grayson attacking Webster's social positions. Comparing him to the Taliban is way over the top. Peter Schorsch has a post how the ad has galvanized Republicans. GOP media strategist Rick Wilson claims the Webster campaign has raised $300,000 from the right-wing push back against Grayson. Wilson makes a statement I absolutely agreee with.
As for the earned media narrative, it went from: “pugnacious, well-funded Alan Grayson” to “barking lunatic and liar Alan Grayson” in just 24 hours. The Factcheck.org takedowns of Grayson’s two spots here and here are unequivocal: Grayson’s ads are false and misleading. Poltifact feels the same way.
Grayson's own internal poll showed him with a commanding lead over Webster. Grayson could have run a positive ad talking about his family and the things he stands for. Instead, he decides to stoop to Karl Rove-level swift boating. Grayson is like a pitbull that doesn't know when not to attack. The one person that seems to think this ad was a great idea is Kenneth Quinnell. This kind of political savvy explains why Quinnell was such a success on the Meek campaign.
Update: The Buzz reports the negative reaction to the "Taliban Dan Webster" ad is benefitting Webster.
A source close to the campaign told the Buzz that Webster has already received $40,000 from people outraged by the ad. The campaign sent an e-mail to potential donors but has also benefited from media coverage -- from MSNBC to Glenn Beck -- in the past two days.
No comments:
Post a Comment