SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Will The GOP's Negativity Produce A Backlash?
Sep 06, 2008
After a long week in Denver and another
week in Minneapolis, I'm traveling home today and thus won't have much
time to post, but I wanted to follow up on the discussion that ensued
yesterday in response to my post
arguing that, particularly in light of the brutal personal attacks on
Obama at the Convention, Democrats ought to be far more aggressively
critical of McCain and the GOP generally. Many people in comments and
by e-mail argued that Americans dislike negativity and that Sarah
Palin's speech, in particular, would backfire on the Republicans.
The first polling data is now available on this question and it's rather conclusive. First, from SurveyUSA, yesterday:
What grade do you give [Palin] on the speech? An A, B, C, D, or an F?
A - 60
B - 11
C - 11
D - 9
F - 8
On the whole, is Sarah Palin an asset to John McCain? A liability to McCain? Or, do you not know enough to say?
Asset - 55
Liability - 24
Don't know enough - 19
Does McCain's selection of Sarah
Palin as a running mate reflect well on McCain? Reflect poorly on
McCain? Or do you not know enough to say?Reflects well on McCain - 55
Reflects poorly - 30
Don't know enough - 14
If you were placing a bet today,
would you bet that Barack Obama will be elected president? Or, John
McCain will be elected president?Obama - 45
McCain - 48
Don't know - 7
Then there is this Rasmussen Reports poll from today, taken after Palin's speech:
A
week ago, most Americans had never heard of Alaska Governor Sarah
Palin. Now, following a Vice Presidential acceptance speech viewed live
by more than 40 million people, Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of
American voters. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey
finds that 37% hold an unfavorable view of the self-described hockey
mom.The figures include 40% with a Very Favorable opinion of Palin and
18% with a Very Unfavorable view (full demographic crosstabs are
available for Premium Members). Before her acceptance speech, Palin was
viewed favorably by 52%. A week ago, 67% had never heard of her. . . .Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin's favorable ratings are
now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential
tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each
viewed favorably by 57% of voters. Biden is viewed favorably by 48%.
A CBS poll taken during the GOP Convention shows Obama and McCain tied (after showing Obama with a 6-point lead last week), while the Gallup daily tracking poll continues to show Obama with a 7-point lead.
None of this is to say that Palin can't be turned into a liability for
the Republicans. She can be. And although I can only guess like
everyone else, I've thought all year that Democrats would likely win
the election and still think that.
But the idea that Americans instinctively recoil from negativity or
that there will be some sort of backlash against Republicans generally
and Palin specifically because of how "negative" their convention
speeches were is pure fantasy. Cultural tribalism and personality
attacks of those sort work, especially when they're not aggressively
engaged.
Every four years, the GOP unleashes unrestrained personality attacks on
Democrats and exploits cultural resentments. Every four years,
Democrats tell themselves that such attacks don't work and are
counter-productive. And every four years, that belief is disproven.
These "character" issues end up mattering largely because Democrats, in
election after election, allow wars over "character" to be waged in a
largely one-sided fashion.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Salon
Glenn Greenwald
Glenn Greenwald is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, constitutional lawyer, commentator, author of three New York Times best-selling books on politics and law, and a former staff writer and editor at First Look media. His fifth and latest book is, "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State," about the U.S. surveillance state and his experiences reporting on the Snowden documents around the world. Glenn's column was featured at Guardian US and Salon. His previous books include: "With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful," "Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics," and "A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency." He is the recipient of the first annual I.F. Stone Award for Independent Journalism, a George Polk Award, and was on The Guardian team that won the Pulitzer Prize for public interest journalism in 2014.
After a long week in Denver and another
week in Minneapolis, I'm traveling home today and thus won't have much
time to post, but I wanted to follow up on the discussion that ensued
yesterday in response to my post
arguing that, particularly in light of the brutal personal attacks on
Obama at the Convention, Democrats ought to be far more aggressively
critical of McCain and the GOP generally. Many people in comments and
by e-mail argued that Americans dislike negativity and that Sarah
Palin's speech, in particular, would backfire on the Republicans.
The first polling data is now available on this question and it's rather conclusive. First, from SurveyUSA, yesterday:
What grade do you give [Palin] on the speech? An A, B, C, D, or an F?
A - 60
B - 11
C - 11
D - 9
F - 8
On the whole, is Sarah Palin an asset to John McCain? A liability to McCain? Or, do you not know enough to say?
Asset - 55
Liability - 24
Don't know enough - 19
Does McCain's selection of Sarah
Palin as a running mate reflect well on McCain? Reflect poorly on
McCain? Or do you not know enough to say?Reflects well on McCain - 55
Reflects poorly - 30
Don't know enough - 14
If you were placing a bet today,
would you bet that Barack Obama will be elected president? Or, John
McCain will be elected president?Obama - 45
McCain - 48
Don't know - 7
Then there is this Rasmussen Reports poll from today, taken after Palin's speech:
A
week ago, most Americans had never heard of Alaska Governor Sarah
Palin. Now, following a Vice Presidential acceptance speech viewed live
by more than 40 million people, Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of
American voters. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey
finds that 37% hold an unfavorable view of the self-described hockey
mom.The figures include 40% with a Very Favorable opinion of Palin and
18% with a Very Unfavorable view (full demographic crosstabs are
available for Premium Members). Before her acceptance speech, Palin was
viewed favorably by 52%. A week ago, 67% had never heard of her. . . .Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin's favorable ratings are
now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential
tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each
viewed favorably by 57% of voters. Biden is viewed favorably by 48%.
A CBS poll taken during the GOP Convention shows Obama and McCain tied (after showing Obama with a 6-point lead last week), while the Gallup daily tracking poll continues to show Obama with a 7-point lead.
None of this is to say that Palin can't be turned into a liability for
the Republicans. She can be. And although I can only guess like
everyone else, I've thought all year that Democrats would likely win
the election and still think that.
But the idea that Americans instinctively recoil from negativity or
that there will be some sort of backlash against Republicans generally
and Palin specifically because of how "negative" their convention
speeches were is pure fantasy. Cultural tribalism and personality
attacks of those sort work, especially when they're not aggressively
engaged.
Every four years, the GOP unleashes unrestrained personality attacks on
Democrats and exploits cultural resentments. Every four years,
Democrats tell themselves that such attacks don't work and are
counter-productive. And every four years, that belief is disproven.
These "character" issues end up mattering largely because Democrats, in
election after election, allow wars over "character" to be waged in a
largely one-sided fashion.
Glenn Greenwald
Glenn Greenwald is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, constitutional lawyer, commentator, author of three New York Times best-selling books on politics and law, and a former staff writer and editor at First Look media. His fifth and latest book is, "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State," about the U.S. surveillance state and his experiences reporting on the Snowden documents around the world. Glenn's column was featured at Guardian US and Salon. His previous books include: "With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful," "Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics," and "A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency." He is the recipient of the first annual I.F. Stone Award for Independent Journalism, a George Polk Award, and was on The Guardian team that won the Pulitzer Prize for public interest journalism in 2014.
After a long week in Denver and another
week in Minneapolis, I'm traveling home today and thus won't have much
time to post, but I wanted to follow up on the discussion that ensued
yesterday in response to my post
arguing that, particularly in light of the brutal personal attacks on
Obama at the Convention, Democrats ought to be far more aggressively
critical of McCain and the GOP generally. Many people in comments and
by e-mail argued that Americans dislike negativity and that Sarah
Palin's speech, in particular, would backfire on the Republicans.
The first polling data is now available on this question and it's rather conclusive. First, from SurveyUSA, yesterday:
What grade do you give [Palin] on the speech? An A, B, C, D, or an F?
A - 60
B - 11
C - 11
D - 9
F - 8
On the whole, is Sarah Palin an asset to John McCain? A liability to McCain? Or, do you not know enough to say?
Asset - 55
Liability - 24
Don't know enough - 19
Does McCain's selection of Sarah
Palin as a running mate reflect well on McCain? Reflect poorly on
McCain? Or do you not know enough to say?Reflects well on McCain - 55
Reflects poorly - 30
Don't know enough - 14
If you were placing a bet today,
would you bet that Barack Obama will be elected president? Or, John
McCain will be elected president?Obama - 45
McCain - 48
Don't know - 7
Then there is this Rasmussen Reports poll from today, taken after Palin's speech:
A
week ago, most Americans had never heard of Alaska Governor Sarah
Palin. Now, following a Vice Presidential acceptance speech viewed live
by more than 40 million people, Palin is viewed favorably by 58% of
American voters. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey
finds that 37% hold an unfavorable view of the self-described hockey
mom.The figures include 40% with a Very Favorable opinion of Palin and
18% with a Very Unfavorable view (full demographic crosstabs are
available for Premium Members). Before her acceptance speech, Palin was
viewed favorably by 52%. A week ago, 67% had never heard of her. . . .Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin's favorable ratings are
now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential
tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each
viewed favorably by 57% of voters. Biden is viewed favorably by 48%.
A CBS poll taken during the GOP Convention shows Obama and McCain tied (after showing Obama with a 6-point lead last week), while the Gallup daily tracking poll continues to show Obama with a 7-point lead.
None of this is to say that Palin can't be turned into a liability for
the Republicans. She can be. And although I can only guess like
everyone else, I've thought all year that Democrats would likely win
the election and still think that.
But the idea that Americans instinctively recoil from negativity or
that there will be some sort of backlash against Republicans generally
and Palin specifically because of how "negative" their convention
speeches were is pure fantasy. Cultural tribalism and personality
attacks of those sort work, especially when they're not aggressively
engaged.
Every four years, the GOP unleashes unrestrained personality attacks on
Democrats and exploits cultural resentments. Every four years,
Democrats tell themselves that such attacks don't work and are
counter-productive. And every four years, that belief is disproven.
These "character" issues end up mattering largely because Democrats, in
election after election, allow wars over "character" to be waged in a
largely one-sided fashion.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy