A few weeks back Dole Institute guests Jerry Austin and Whit Ayres spent a considerable amount of time discussing the impact and appeal of negative ads. This New York Times article explores Elizabeth Dole’s Senate race in North Carolina and discusses the impact of negative ads and campaign financing which have conspired to put Dole’s incumbency in jeopardy. Real Clear Politics latest polling data shows Dole’s opponent Kay Hagen up by 3.3 points, 46.8 Hagen, 43.5 Dole as of October 15th.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/us/politics/16dole.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
The article also brings up an interesting question connected to this Senate race regarding residency for elected officials. One of the strategies that Dole’s opponent Kay Hagen has been successfully lobbing her way is that Dole is “an absentee” who “doesn’t leave Washington.” The article quotes a Poli-Sci professor at UNC who says… “…there is a sense in the state capitol that Mrs. Dole had been disengaged, but it’s hard to know how much of this sinks in to the general public, the general voters.” Obviously this is a strategy that only plays if it’s covered in the press, but I’m curious what others think about a candidate based on the amount of time they spend in their state. In the internet era, how have our expectations and perceptions changed on this issue?
The article does a fairly tidy job summarizing the campaign thus far. With the election closing in it would appear the momentum is continuing to move towards Hagen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment