Quote:
Originally posted by Nightwing:
I think you're right John when you say they defend themselves by saying how bad the other is. Just once I would like a canidate to campaign with the faith in their program instead of elect me because the other is so bad.
I wonder if it would be feasible to have an eight hour program twice before the election in which the canidates state their strengths and then debate each other after. No more campaigning and wasting so much money. Put the money they save into education or some worthwhile fund.
I have never been swayed, one way or anouther, by any political campaign commercial or on site visit. I just think it is a waste of time and money.
|
That would be a good idea,(not the education part, the USA spends more money per capita then any other country on education allready and we still haven't had any change in our standings
) I learned a long time ago in school for advertizing that "the other product is bad and we're better" ads don't do anywhere as good as "we are good" ads. ie: old Pepsi adds with the taste test stuff, so what if 4 out of 5 thought Pespi was the better tasting, Coke out sold them 2:1, Coke had positive ads. Negative ads convince those that are allready going to vote that way they are still making the right choice. Positive ads convince them on the fence and not to strongly supporting their canidate to consider the canidate placing the ad.