Washington Free Beacon: Ossoff Going Negative, Though He Said He Wouldn’t
Brent Scher at The Washington Free Beacon is reporting that Jon Ossoff has gone negative in his campaigning in GA-6 against Karen Handel despite committing publicly to running a positive campaign. He has released a negative ad (provided by AJC) that follows a Democratic National Committee narrative.
In Ossoff’s own words:
“Anger is just not who I am, and I don’t think it’s what voters in the 6th district want. They want respectful, decent representation that contrasts so starkly with what we have in Washington. I made it clear that I can run a positive campaign and do it better.” – To Esquire Magazine
“I’m not campaigning across the district talking about Donald Trump at every event. There are many in this district who are concerned that the president may embarrass us on the world stage, that he may be incompetent and that he’s dishonest. I share those concerns, but by running a positive campaign focused on core American values, the contrast is obvious.” – To The New York Times
“In a district like this, running a positive campaign and not indulging the mudslinging, we can win.” – To flippable
About Author
lawtonsack
Lawton is a graduate of Georgia Southern University (the GSU) with a degree in Information Technology. He has held numerous positions within the Georgia Republican Party throughout the years.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I don’t think one attack ad is going negative when the most of their messaging is pro-Ossof. Especially compared to what Karen Handel is doing; where the vast majority of her ads and messaging are anti-Ossoff rather then pro-Handel. That’s what a negative campaign really looks like. Not the I blame them, if I was running a campaign for a candidate with all of Hillary’s charisma but none of her experience I’d want to keep the focus off Handel too.
I agree. Blowing the horn due to one message seems a bit petty.
I think he can run a positive campaign while still highlighting some of the negatives in his opponent’s political career. It’s not like he implied she was on the jihadists’ payroll or anything.
Handle never denied being on a jihadi payroll. Should be asked.
I have repeatedly asked the Handel campaign for her position on climate change. Crickets.
How can we have a clean campaign if one of the candidates refuses to acknowledge an issue that 75 percent of GA06 say needs to be addressed?
Believe or don’t, but tell us what you think. Please.
This just in from the Handel campaign: It’s cold in the winter, hot in the summer and milder in between…
I appreciate your humorous remarks.
But I would appreciate even more a simple, respectful statement of Karen’s position.
When 75 percent of GA06 voters believe CO2 should be controlled, we should all be taking their views seriously.
Thanks for seeing it as it was intended. Respectfully to you and those that think it’s an important issue, I believe MMGW to be a socialist, money-grabbing scam. You will obviously disagree. Having said that, I think if she came out, stood up and vigorously said she believed it to be junk science, she’d see more money than God go into her coffers from Repubs and they’d go door to door between now until the June runoff. She’d win by 10 points, even in the changing 6th.
Certainly you have a right to your opinion Norway, but your viewpoint is rejected by 97 percent of climate scientists and 99 percent of peer reviewed scientific studies.
Not to mention 75 percent of GA06 voters.
There are plenty of conservative republicans who support taking action to control CO2. Check out the carbon fee program proposed by the conservative Climate Leadership Conference.
I would still like to know Karen’s position. we deserve transparency from our candidates.
#Gasp!
#ConservativesOutraged!
Bless your hearts. I wish I had more to contribute, but the above commentary covers it.