Donald Trump is already running campaign ads....why aren't Democrats responding in kind?

[kentuck]

If there was ever a time for a political ad, it is now. After he ran his mouth, and his Party investigated for years the deaths of 4 Americans in Ben Ghazi, he conveniently forgets to honor the 4 Americans that were killed in Niger a couple of weeks ago. There is no excuse. He should be called to answer for it.

But, Democrats should not feel the need to run ads on MSNBC or CNN, because their listeners already know about it. However, it probably has never been mentioned on FOX? It is doubtful. That is where they need to run their ads. And they should follow the lead of the Republicans and let some 3rd party group without the Democratic Party name pay for the ad.

Yes, it is too early to start campaigning for the next election but Democrats cannot stand silently by and let Donald Trump run his own campaign ads without responding. Just my opinion.

[Hortensis]

1. And, here you promptly leap in by criticizing Democrats also.

That seems like a response literally "in kind."

Any "kind" words for Democrats, Kentuck? I could use some.

What's your favorite Democratic ideal? One the Democratic Party has always stood for?

[kentuck]

6. Courage.

Courage to speak out.

He is running ads for his re-election. I take them very seriously.

Obviously, he is very sensitive to this Niger ambush, since it shows him as insensitive and uncaring about the lives of our servicemen. Yes, the Democrats should tell FOX viewers just what type of person they are supporting.

[Hortensis]

17. Kind words for the DEMOCRATIC PARTY? Your favorite DEMOCRATIC PARTY ideal?

[Lee-Lee]

2. And what candidate should they be running ads for?

[ehrnst]

3. What in particular should they be saying? It costs some money to run ads

so there needs to be a measurable return on that.

And if DT doesn't make it to the next election, ads against his candidacy are wasted money.

[kentuck]

4. Does not compute??

Perhaps the response ads could get him out of office early? If not, and there is no response, then he will continue to consolidate his base and will be much more difficult to defeat in 2020 than any of us might imagine.

[ehrnst]

5. In what way could response ads "get him out of office earlier?"

[kentuck]

7. First of all...

It might help to get a Democratic House. That is the first step. Nothing is going to happen so long as Republicans are in charge, that is for sure.

My point is that he should not be given ad time without a response. That does not help any of us.

The Niger issue is a perfect opportunity, in my opinion.

[ehrnst]

10. How does an ad "responding to DT" help us to get a Democratic house?

How do you justify the money for an ad that could be used in actual targeted district campaigns be spent on a nebulous "answer" to him?

He's not being "given" ad time, he's paying for it.

[Greybnk48]

8. In Wisconsin, they're running Koch ads against Tammy Baldwin

about the tax cuts they so desperately want. Over and over and over.

[kentuck]

9. We can sit back and do nothing.

But we will probably pay a dear price for doing so.

Their propaganda machine is spinning full speed.

[DrDan]

11. huh? We have a candidate? Guess I missed it.

[kentuck]

12. I think that is part of the problem?

Why does it have to be about a "candidate"?

Why can't it be about the Party? Can we not make an ad for the Party as a whole, instead of one specific candidate??

[DrDan]

13. because we vote for "candidates", not parties

I think we need to be judicious with our funds. Spend them wisely when we want to trigger an action by the voters - like voting for a particular candidate or to contact representatives when a major issue is at-hand.

Seems like to simply respond to a trump ad would come across as more negative campaigning . . . and we are accused of that enough.

[kentuck]

14. We can be a judicious minority...

again in the next Congress. Do we want to separate Donald Trump from the Republican Party?

[ehrnst]

16. Absolutely. (nt)

[ehrnst]

15. Why don't you ask "the party?"

I think that if it would do some good, they would spend the big bucks.

I think they have a better idea of what good it would do, or not do.

In the meantime there are other organizations that run ads on specific issues, like health care, immigration, etc.

Not re-inventing the wheel is a part of good organizing.

[Corgigal]

18. Cause his lawyers fees went up.

I can't assist the dumb asses who are funding it.

[LeftInTX]

19. I agree...we don't need candidates

There are liberal PACs such as Move On etc who can create anti-Trump ads based on the issues.

[ehrnst]

20. Exactly why the Democratic Party doesn't need to spend the money on it. (nt)