Thursday, December 4, 2014

So NOW Hagan wants to go positive?

So U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan now says Democrats would have done better in last month's elections if only President Obama had been more outspoken about all the positive things Democrats have done. The economy has been improving for years, Hagan said, but "The president hasn't used the bully pulpit to get that message out in a way that resonates with people."

Embracing Obama? Getting out a positive message? If only Hagan and her supporters had thought of that before running millions of dollars of negative TV ads against Republican Thom Tillis. And wasn't that Hagan pointedly hitting Obama and not appearing on stage with him when he traveled to Charlotte for a veterans event in August?

Hagan now wishes Obama had been touting Democrats' achievements. But most North Carolinians know she kept Obama at arm's length until now and will forever remember the 2014 N.C. Senate campaign as being the most expensive, and one of the ugliest and most vapid, of their lifetimes.

If Hagan wanted Obama to tout his leadership, why did she have such a hard time doing so herself in the first video below? And if she wanted to accentuate the positive, why did she run ads about Tillis cutting education spending (video 2 below) and warning elderly voters that he's sure to cut Medicare (video 3)? Then there was the ad from the Senate Majority PAC on Hagan's behalf (video 4) saying that Tillis gave tax breaks to yacht and jet owners -- a claim that PolitiFact rated "False."

We didn't support Tillis' campaign, which was also primarily negative, but it rings hollow for Hagan to now long for a positive message from Obama when she distanced herself from him throughout the campaign and offered so little of that herself.


6 comments:

telamon said...

Politicians gonna politate, -tate, -tate, -tate...

Bussta Brown said...

Tillis and Hagan both ran negative campaigns so there is no need to point that out here. However, it's a little late and hypocritical for Hagan to complain about the lack of support from the President when she had every opportunity to get his support during her campaign. Like the other spineless Democrats that lost, she distanced herself from the President and ran as Republican-lite. That did nothing to fire up her base which included a lot of President Obama supporters.

She treated her core supporters like second-class citizens by clandestinely appealing to them through the back door. Democrats need to learn to be bolder in advocating for common causes. We simply are tire of supporting weak public officials. Democrats are not going to change the minds of hard core Republicans, so they need to put more effort into getting their core supporters to the polls. Hagan could have done that by campaigning in NC with President Obama. She chose otherwise. Now she wants to cry about it. Sorry, it's too late.

And the President was probably thinking, you didn't support me before, so why should I expend my efforts trying to return you to Washington for more of the same.

If Hagan decides to challenge Burr in 2016, this attempt by her to blame the President for her poorly ran campaign, makes her less attractive. Democrats just want candidates who run for office to have their backbones intact. Otherwise just stay on the sideline because you're only taking up space that could be put to greater use!

John said...

I think there are a ton of Americans who would take issue with her claim about the improved economy! In any case, as was clearly demonstrated by the national result, whether Democrats embraced Obama or ran from him, the voters sent them home BECAUSE of him!

James Edgar said...

What I want is somebody, ANYBODY, who actually wants to GOVERN instead of spending every ounce of energy they have into attempting to eliminate their opponents from existence. Democrats don't want to govern, they just want to make Republicans vanish from the face of the Earth. Republicans don't want to govern, they just want to make Democrats vanish from the face of the Earth. I'm sick to death of both of them.

Garth Vader said...

James Edgar,

So I take it you voted for the Libertarian in the Senate race?

Bubba said...

Hagan can go positive and Tillis can speak his mind using his own words because the election is over. The Negative is allowed unlimited funding but not the Positive. Not only are your personal contributions restricted but you risk public scrutiny and even harassment. If you contribute incorrectly you could conceivably go to jail. If you want more positive messaging raise the personal limits and reporting thresholds and index these to inflation. I prefer higher limits all 'round, more political speech not less. Without this change campaigns will remain negative. You get what you are allowed to pay for.