Republican Senator Goes 100% Positive in Reelection Campaign
Although Norm Coleman is a sitting Senator for the state of Minnesota, he is running an uphill battle for reelection nonetheless. He is currently trailing his main competitor Al Franken in the polls, and he is seriously harmed by the candidate of the Independent Party, Dean Barkley.
The last week was especially gruesome for Coleman after controversy after controversy erupted. The collapse of the financial markets is, of course, not in his interest either.
The above led Coleman to conclude that this campaign needed a radical change. After having attacked his main rivals for months through negative ads, he announced on Friday that all those negative ads would be pulled from the airwaves and that he would run a 100% positive campaign from now onwards.
Although one might have expected his rivals to celebrate Coleman’s decision, they quite inexplicably criticized him for being hypocritical. Franken called the move “cynical” and “a stunt,” for instance. “From the start, our campaign has focused on the change Minnesota needs,” Franken said. “And we will continue to focus on our competing views of how our country has gone in the wrong direction, how we can curb the influence of special interests in Washington, and how we can get out of the tough economic situation we’re now in.”
Chris Truscott, a spokesman for Dean Barkley, responded agitated as well. “It’s great that Sen. Coleman’s going to respect Minnesotans’ intelligence for the first time in this campaign,” Truscott said. “But it’s an awful lot like trying to unring a bell.” Furthermore, Truscott argued, it was easy for Coleman to say he would only approve positive ads because there are many independent organizations running negative ads on his behalf.
Although many Americans and Minnesotans would undoubtedly celebrate Coleman’s decision if it would have been taken months ago, it seems likely that most will see it for what it is now: an opportunistic ploy.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
