The Briefing Room

Exclusive Content => Editorials => Topic started by: pjohns on July 13, 2017, 05:24:37 PM

Title: Opposition research
Post by: pjohns on July 13, 2017, 05:24:37 PM
Although "opposition research" in America is hardly a new thing--it goes back at least to 1824 (almost 200 years)--it was on the wane prior to Bill Clinton. And nowadays it is entirely ubiquitous.

To me, what this essentially says is this: "I will not even attempt to make myself liked by a majority of the voting public. Rather, I will just try to make most voters hate my opponent even more than they hate me."

To say that this is a cynical ploy is an enormous understatement, it seems to me.

Comments?
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: Oceander on July 13, 2017, 09:12:28 PM
What evidence is there it was on the wane?
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: Rivergirl on July 13, 2017, 09:19:41 PM
Muckraker personified.........that's what we elected to the presidency.
Shame on us
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: pjohns on July 14, 2017, 10:29:26 AM
What evidence is there it was on the wane?

Well, I was born in 1948; and I really did not see much of it, prior to 1992 (and the Clinton campaign).
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: pjohns on July 14, 2017, 10:31:26 AM
Muckraker personified.........that's what we elected to the presidency.
Shame on us

Whereas you may dislike Donald Trump, the fact is that this tendency did not start with him.

It started, in recent times, about a quarter-century ago. 
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: skeeter on July 14, 2017, 10:36:46 AM
Well, I was born in 1948; and I really did not see much of it, prior to 1992 (and the Clinton campaign).

It seemed to ramp up as a result of Reagan's popularity as the left tried the indirect method of picking off those around him. The Clinton Crime Syndicate brought it to a high art form, although in all fairness it seems Lee Atwater was pretty adept at it.
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: Bigun on July 14, 2017, 10:40:52 AM
Well, I was born in 1948; and I really did not see much of it, prior to 1992 (and the Clinton campaign).

Just because YOU didn't see it doesn't mean it wasn't there!  Witness the 1960 Kennedy campaign and every single one that followed that!
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: EasyAce on July 14, 2017, 05:20:04 PM
Well, I was born in 1948; and I really did not see much of it, prior to 1992 (and the Clinton campaign).
Lyndon Johnson used it regarding Barry Goldwater.

Richard Nixon used it regarding assorted Democrats in 1968 before the nomination went to Hubert Humphrey, and
both sides there used it against each other. Likewise against McGovern in 1972.

Opposition research wasn't much discussed, not to the extent it's been since Bill Clinton, but it was there.
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: Oceander on July 14, 2017, 07:38:35 PM
Well, I was born in 1948; and I really did not see much of it, prior to 1992 (and the Clinton campaign).

That may have more to do with the fact that it was more heavily guarded (and a lot harder to do than today with the internets).

The Soviets most assuredly tried to interfere in US elections. 
Title: Re: Opposition research
Post by: pjohns on July 15, 2017, 01:51:23 PM


Opposition research wasn't much discussed, not to the extent it's been since Bill Clinton, but it was there.


Perhaps you are correct.

But I deeply despise the very idea of professional politicians--who are willing to do just about anything in order to get elected--and who therefore wish to denigrate their respective opponents.  (If plumbers, electricians, and carpenters ran for office--including even high office--they would have no reason to consider it a major downturn in their respective careers if they lost; and would therefore be less likely, I think, to play dirty.  This is just another reason, in my opinion, to seriously desire the total destruction of The Political Class.)