Does This Election Prove That Negative Campaigns Are Losers?

Intelligence would prove so and let's hope it's more than a trend, because I think they will never truly die.

Obama won partially because he had a clarified non-wavering strategy rather than McCain who ran on the issue of the week train wreck.

No.

McCain had an uphill battle, given that almost everyone realizes what a disaster Bush has been. Add to that the crisis, and McCain's insane series of responses to it, and there's a lot of reason for people to reject him.

The other thing, more directly related, is how much McCain's campaign called ALL of us un-American. Few live in small towns, where REAL Americans live. So I'm probably not the only city-dweller to feel personally dissed.

AND, they really hyped their crowds into over the top ugliness -- whichBush didn't do. I mean, when you hear people screaming "KILL HIM!" it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Then there was McCain's ineffectual attempts at back-pedalling toward the end (while he was STILL claling Obama "dangerous" and "a terrorist" and such).

This ONE result, by itself, is just insufficient to "prove" anything, really.

But wouldn't it be nice if political campaingers concluded it was?

It's really up to each of US to not be swayed more by hate than by every other consideration.

And, a LOT of people WERE so swayed -- about 46% voted for McCain, and a lot of them believed all the hate-mongering and fear-mongering lies. Many people responded.

Negative campaigners always have little to say about what they offer to the country. But it has worked in the past, with Bush/Rove against McCain in 2000, and of course against Gore and Kerry. But it seems to me that Americans see negative campaigning for what it is - hot air. I look forward to more civilized election campaigns in the future.

I think people didn't want to see negativity. Isn't there enough negativity going on in the world? That's why some people refuse to even watch the News. They wanted too see what each candidate was about and what they wanted for America.

Hopefully this will teach presidential candidates in the future that running a negative campaign will get you nowhere fast.

nicely, if you're a Democrat or a Liberal, some thing that your opponent says about issues that you've surely suggested or did is termed "unfavourable campaigning" and the click calls it as such and makes the Republican look undesirable. if you're a Conservative or a Republican, some thing unfavourable suggested about you, even if actual or no longer is broadcast by skill of NPR, CBC, ABC or NBC without question, and makes you look undesirable.

Perhaps the lesson is--if you can't promote your own agenda AND hurl the negatives simultaneously, then you won't be able to do the job of President.

McCain shoveled out so much negativity without any positives, that he lost all sense of proportion.

How funny. No, it proves people are unwilling to do their own research and fall prey to the psychology that was at work with the Obama camp. Or did you forget about him raping Joe? Or ACORN? Or Wright? Not smears...all true. So, again, all it proved is a little over half the country only watches certain tv stations.

I think it shows we have an ignorant electorate.

No, it proves that we're beginning to move in that direction.

No, it proves don't have an unpopular president in the same party as you.

And be black.