Wow. Touchy aren't we today? :o) It appears to me that it is not possible to discuss this with you. The forest is behind those trees Mike. You are only going by the media reports. The media only broadcasts bits and pieces that are attention grabbers. I think if you really wanted a more realistic view you would consider actually listening to the speeches of Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin and watch all of the ads. It will be a real eye opener. I don't think either side is more negative than the other. I had no idea Chicago was so isolated. I guess since Obama is from that area it should not be surprising.

Here's another article to get you started:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7694856.stm

Analysis by the University of Wisconsin Advertising Project shows that both candidates have used negative ads, despite Mr Obama's accusation, in the final presidential debate, that Mr McCain had run a wholly negative campaign.

The McCain camp did, it's true, use a higher proportion of attack ads.

Mr McCain has aired proportionately more attack ads, but roughly the same number overall
In the four months to 4 October, 47% of Republican ads were negative (focusing on Obama), 26% were positive, and 27% were mixed, the Wisconsin study says. (For comparison, 70% of the ads used by George W Bush in 2004 were negative.)

On the Democratic ads, 35% were negative, 39% were positive, and 25% were mixed.

But the study points out that since the Democrats have aired twice as many ads, in total the amount of negative advertising is pretty even.


There is an abundance of negative ads airing in North Carolina. Every commercial break I see a negative ad by Obama. Sometimes it is the same one over and over.

Or how about Wendy Button, Obama's speech writer who quit:

I can no longer justify what this party has done and can’t dismiss the treatment of women and working people as just part of the new kind of politics. It’s wrong and someone has to say that. And also say that the Democratic Party’s talking points—that Senator John McCain is just four more years of the same and that he’s President Bush—are now just hooker lines that fit a very effective and perhaps wave-winning political argument…doesn’t mean they’re true. After all, he is the only one who’s worked in a bipartisan way on big challenges.

More on her by her:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-28/so-long-obama/1/


>The Washington Post article discusses ads run during one week, the week after the Republican convention. The Neilsen link lists raw number of ads run in selected states but says nothing about how many total ads were run or percentage which were negative. Also, both of them only discuss ads. What about what the candidates are saying on the campaign trail? I read the news stories every day and all I hear from McCain and Palin is criticisms of Obama -- he's pals with terrorists, he'll take all your money, he can't handle Al Qauda, ad nauseum. Have you been seeing positive statements about their own candidacy that I have missed?
>
>Yes, the Obama campaign has raised more than any in history, both in terms of dollars and number of donors. Do you have a problem with that? All it tells me is a lot of people see enough in Obama's candidacy to contribute money to it. Is there something nefarious in that? Maybe if more people believed in McCain's campaign he wouldn't have to spend all his time whining.
>
>>I think you are missing quite a few of the Obama commercials and robocalls then. perhaps they are not shown in your area...
>>
>>This study agrees with me:
>>
>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703581.html
>>
>>Despite perceptions that Sen. John McCain has spent more time on the attack, Sen. Barack Obama aired more negative advertising last week than did the Arizona Republican, says a study released yesterday.
>>
>>and this one:
>>
>>http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/obama-and-mccains-ads-equally-negative/
>>
>>Despite finger-pointing from both sides, Barack Obama and John McCain’s presidential campaigns have run almost the same number of negative local campaign ads, Nielsen Monitor-Plus reported Thursday.
>>
>>Open your eyes Mike. At least be realistic and stop focusing on one single candidate as the victim and the other the evil one. It is a typical campaign (other than the money Obama has to use for his which I heard last night on the news was the highest in history).
>>
>>
>>
>>>Are you seriously equating the degree of negative campaigning? You must just be yanking my chain. Stirring that pot, as always ;-) McCain and Palin have gone entirely negative. Have they said anything in weeks about what a McCain administration would do? Not that I've heard. All they have been doing is trying to spread increasingly desperate FUD about Obama. Obama, in contrast, didn't even mention McCain in his half hour infomercial last night, according to what I read.
>>>
>>>>It's funny to hear on the news about the 'negative campaigning.' Both sides are doing it. In that sense, it is not any different than previous elections.
>>>>