Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In Election Night editorial, New York Times slams Clinton's 'negativity'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 12:19 PM
Original message
In Election Night editorial, New York Times slams Clinton's 'negativity'
CNN: April 23, 2008
NY Times slams Clinton's 'negativity'

(CNN) — Fresh off her victory in Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton is facing a stinging rebuke of her campaign tactics from her hometown paper, The New York Times. In the paper's Wednesday edition, the editorial board which endorsed Clinton's White House bid earlier this year says the New York senator's "negativity" is doing "harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election."

"The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it," the board writes.

The paper finds fault in Clinton's latest campaign ad, which includes an image of Osama bin Laden, and asks, "Who do you think has what it takes?" "Mrs Clinton became the first Democratic candidate to wave the bloody shirt of 9/11," they write, adding that it is a tactic that is "torn right from Karl Rove’s playbook."

"Mrs. Clinton does more than just turn off voters who don’t like negative campaigning," the editorial also states. "She undercuts the rationale for her candidacy that led this page and others to support her: that she is more qualified, right now, to be president than Mr. Obama."

The paper also says Barack Obama deserves some of the blame for the negative tone. "He is increasingly rising to Mrs. Clinton’s bait, undercutting his own claims that he is offering a higher more inclusive form of politics." But the editorial makes clear the paper thinks most of the blame lies with Clinton. "If she is ever to have a hope of persuading (superdelegates) to come back to her side, let alone win over the larger body of voters, she has to call off the dogs."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/23/ny-times-slams-clintons-negativity/#more-6643
Refresh | +3 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Rene Donating Member (758 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Those editors need to read www.attacktimeline.com and find out who is negative
who started the attacks...who started the race baiting - long ago.......OBAMA
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-23-08 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's always negative when a woman won't bake cookies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC