TRUTH TOPICS:
BERNIE.org > The Truth > TARRANT'S NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN
- Political races will only get nastier - Rutland Herald
- Tarrant's learning the hard way - Brattleboro Reformer
- More than just negative - Eagle Times
------------------------------------------------------
Rutland
Herald Editorial
Political races will only get nastier
September 17, 2006
The primaries are over, and Vermont voters can prepare themselves for
an election like no other. That's because of the unprecedented level
of spending that is likely to occur in the race for the U.S. Senate.
There is little reason to believe that Richard Tarrant, the Republican candidate, has a reasonable chance of defeating Bernard Sanders, Vermont's longtime House member, who is running as an independent. But those long odds have motivated a spending spree of unusual profligacy by Tarrant, who is using money from the personal fortune he amassed as founder of a medical software company. Seeing the wave of TV ads coming at him, Sanders has mounted a huge war chest of his own, and each candidate has spent about $5 million, which is already a record. They are likely to spend that much again or more before the General Election.
Tarrant's ads have inspired an unusually hostile reaction from Vermonters who believe he is distorting Sanders' record and who resent the way he is throwing money around. It is likely that the relatively strong showing by Greg Parke in the Republican primary — he won 31 percent of the vote — was due in part to resentment of Tarrant's big-spending ways.
Tarrant's ad campaign is driving a lot of liberals crazy, drawing their focus toward a race where Sanders is a likely victor and away from a race that is likely to be much closer — between Martha Rainville and Peter Welch for the U.S. House. Reports have suggested that Welch, the Democratic leader of the Senate, has opened a respectable lead in the polls, but if Democratic anger at Tarrant siphons energy away from the House race, Welch's campaign could suffer. Then again, he may benefit from the fierce backlash against Tarrant and, by association, against all Republicans.
Scudder Parker, the Democratic candidate for governor, is having problems cutting into the support enjoyed by Gov. James Douglas from the vast middle of the Vermont political spectrum, where Douglas has pitched his tent with considerable success. Douglas has skillfully identified himself with liberal causes, signing onto Catamount Health and taking on International Paper's plan to burn tires at its plant in Ticonderoga, N.Y. Parker is a candidate with many good ideas on a variety of issues, but Douglas has stolen many issues from him.
The race to watch this year will be that between Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie and the Democratic candidate, Matt Dunne. Dunne, a state senator from Windsor County, won by a healthy margin in a primary against John Tracy of Burlington, and he may be able to persuade Vermont voters that it is time for Dubie to move on. Dubie, who is an officer in the Air Force Reserve, has just been activated and sent to Iraq. His service in the military has been a plus for him. Vermonters respect the expertise he was able to employ pitching in after Sept. 11, and his service in Iraq will win him further respect.
But this is not a good year to be identified with Iraq. Rainville came to public attention through her role as adjutant general of the Vermont National Guard. But as a civilian candidate for the U.S. House, she finds herself identified with a conflict that most Vermonters believe to have been ill-starred from the beginning. Welch is a fierce opponent of the Iraq war, and many voters will gravitate to him for that reason. In the lieutenant governor's race, many Vermonters are likely to see Dunne as the candidate for change.
If that happens, Dunne could quickly move to the front rank of potential leaders in Vermont. There are others, including Treasurer Jeb Spaulding, who has been biding his time as minder of the state's money. Tracy, who gave up a House seat to run for lieutenant governor, cannot be viewed as finished in Vermont politics, even if his future role is service in the Vermont Legislature.
The races down the ticket will be interesting this year, but the noise
and emotion generated by Tarrant's money and his attack ads are likely
to give this election season an edge of bitterness out of proportion
to the actual closeness of the Sanders-Tarrant race. Tarrant has imported
a nasty style of politics to Vermont. Vermonters need to recognize it
for what it is and to look beyond it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Brattleboro
Reformer Editorial -
Tarrant's learning the hard way
Reformer.com
Tuesday, September 5 It takes a lot of ego and a lot of money to run for the U.S. Senate.
Millionaire businessman Richard Tarrant has shown he's got plenty of both. But it also takes intelligence and tactical know-how to run for higher office, and Tarrant and his campaign staff has shown little of either.
Tarrant is running what will likely be the most expensive political campaign in Vermont history. He has spent nearly $5 million saturating local radio and television with his ads since the beginning of the year.
The ad blitz was designed to raise awareness about himself. Instead, he has apparently succeeded in annoying Vermont voters from across the political spectrum.
Perhaps if Tarrant had merely confined himself to hokey autobiographical ads, it wouldn't have been so bad. But his campaign took a dive straight into the mud pit last week when he started airing attack ads against his primary opponent, Congressman Bernard Sanders.
Taking a page from Greg Parke's unsuccessful 2004 U.S. House campaign against Sanders, Tarrant's ads accuse Sanders of supporting child molesters and drug dealers.
The child molester ad was particularly disingenuous. Windham County Republican Committee Chairman George Kuusela of Bellows Falls looks into the camera and tells viewers how Sanders twice voted against "Amber Alert" legislation and voted against mandatory life prison sentences for two-time child molesters.
Kuusela is never identified in the ad as a GOP county chairman. He's just an "old Vermonter" expressing dismay with Sanders and the way he supposedly coddles child molesters. "Bernie should know better," Kuusela says sadly.
Parke tried a similar attack ad in 2004 and it was quickly pulled off the air after Republicans and Democrats alike denounced it. Sanders apparently knew something similar was coming from Tarrant, for he reportedly taped a response ad several months ago to be used the moment Tarrant started attacking him.
"For months, my opponent Rich Tarrant has been spending millions telling us about himself," said Sanders in the response ad. "Well, it's his right and he can spend it if he wants to. But he has no right to distort my record or what I stand for."
As a Congressman, you get to cast a lot of votes on many different bills. Any vote can easily be taken out of context and attacked. In the case of Tarrant's allegations that Sanders is soft on child molesters and drug dealers, Sanders said that he voted against the bills in question either because of constitutional concerns or because the provisions Tarrant highlighted in the ads were attached to legislation that Sanders couldn't support.
What's curious is that Tarrant picked the end of August to run these ads. Normally, this is the sort of mudslinging you see at the end of campaign. Is this an indication of how desperate Tarrant is to make a dent in Sanders' lead, even after the biggest political ad campaign in Vermont history?
The Sanders campaign did a tracking poll last weekend, according to Seven Days political columnist Peter Freyne. They found Sanders has a 65-29 lead over Tarrant, still pretty much unchanged since the beginning of the year. Even more interesting was that the percentage of those polled who believed Tarrant was running a negative campaign rose from 23 percent in July to 52 percent last week.
Vermonters hate negative and obnoxious political campaigns and don't like politicians who sling mud. Tarrant will soon find that out for himself.
------------------------------------------------
Eagle Times Editorial -
More than just negative
Anyone who decides to get into politics, whether at the national, state or local level, must be prepared at some point to become the target of negative ads.
Sometimes it can be their records, other times it gets more personal.
Voters may sniff their nose at the concept but only when it is their candidate who is being targeted; when the reverse is true, and their camp is delivering the blows, why it is just "telling the truth." Fact is, negative campaigning is part of politics and polls show voters, while they may despise it, respond to it. In some instances, it can be quite effective.
Still there is something about the negative ads by Rich Tarrant, Republican candidate for U.S., against Bernie Sanders that are more than just an attack on his record and go far beyond the concept of negative. To be blunt they are despicable.
Sanders, the independent congressman from Vermont will most likely face Tarrant, founder of a computer software company, in the general election in November. Tarrant still must win his primary on Sept. 12.
All summer long voters have been deluged with ads from the Tarrant campaign that all but declare that Sanders is on the side of drug dealers and child molesters and has voted against legislation that would make things tougher on both groups.
The specifics of both pieces of legislation are not what matter here, nor are Sanders' votes. We are sure, given the way laws are made in Washington with everyone's pet project tacked on to the main proposal, Sanders had his reasons for voting no. We can also say with certainty that protecting drug dealers and child molesters were not two of them. It is in poor taste, to put mildly, to assail Sanders' character and state he supports two of our nation's biggest fears. It also takes away from serious debate of the issues.
Sanders' voting record on taxes, health care, education, free trade, the Iraq war and all the other issues facing our country are fair game for this campaign. There is plenty there for those who oppose Sanders without these reprehensible ads.
Tarrant's free spending on these attack ads leaves a bad taste in the mouth of potential voters. A return to debating the issues in a more constructive manner would certainly be a welcome change. Despite this look and feel of a big state campaign, voters should not be swayed from voting in the Sept. 12 primary. If they are, then democracy is the real loser.