U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole's campaign has one more caveat on that 527 ad.
In an e-mail to Dome, campaign manager Marty Ryall notes another problem with Majority Action's radio ad attacking Dole's 2003 vote against a provision to raise mileage standards.
As Ryall points out, the amendment failed 65-32.
"If Senator Dole had voted for the amendment it would have failed 33 to 64 instead of 32 to 65," Ryall writes. "(Is) Majority Action running any ads against the 18 Democrats that voted the same way as Senator Dole?"
They have a fair point about the group running ads against Democrats, especially since it is a so-called "issue ad" that supposedly has nothing to do with the ongoing Senate race.
But the ad is artfully worded to avoid singling Dole out for blame:
"Gas prices are over $4 a gallon, and if you're traveling this holiday weekend one person you can thank for your higher fuel costs is Elizabeth Dole." (Emphasis ours)
Of course, if you're paying a lot for gas because you drive a car, truck or SUV that gets low gas mileage, another person you can thank is yourself.
Blog RSS feed
Re: One more caveat to Majority Action ad
Don't get me wrong—I do (generally) welcome a vigorous analysis of campaign ads (especially television), because the profound impact they have on public opinion is one of the main drivers behind the multi-million dollar fundraising required to run a successful campaign.
People should view these things with a healthy amount of distrust, and seek other sources of information to help them decide who to vote for. Maybe if they did, spending a quarter of a million dollars on a television ad wouldn't result in a 5-7 point jump in the polls, and pretty soon Joe Snuffy could afford to run a competitive campaign again.
All that being said, pointing out that this ad is "artfully worded" seems a touch unnecessary and subjective. They're all artfully worded, if you know what I mean. ;)