527s are good things. PACs are better. The MoveOn ads are from the MoveOn PAC. The SBVT ads are from the SBVT 527. PACs are subject to more disclosure.
As for "what it means for candidates", I think that's entirely subjective. Ustwo, you believe the MoveOn ads are going "too far" and the SBVT ads raise good questions. Of course you do.
Unsuprisingly, my take is very different.
The SBVT ads failed to garner much of an increase in Bush support. Most independents who had paid attention to the ad controversy when it was launched also stuck around and saw all the evidence of the lack of facts on behalf of the SBVT and their clear partisan agenda. The little that did help Bush came from Vets who felt offended by Kerry bringing the fact of the atrocities committed in Vietnam to light.
The MoveOn ads, which are much wider in scope than simply the SBVT attack ads, have brought forward issues that are glossed over completely by Bush, or twisted into successes instead of the failures that the ads accurately portray.
In that sense, most MoveOn ads help everyone because they are about the issues. SBVT ads hurt everyone because they're nothing more than proven fabrications.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ARTelevision
I've seen all the ads and I pretty much agree with your analysis here.
|
Coming from the guy who has decided to intentionally support any President because he sees his peers offering "too much" dissent of the President, I can't say your agreement means much.