The Coleman-Wellstone race is heating up. Coleman has been under intense pressure to be more aggressive and has hired a new ad agency. I assume this is the result. The Minneapolis Star Tribune’s account is naturally favorable to Wellstone; I haven’t seen the ads and can’t comment on their likely effect. The basic question is, if the campaign stays aggressive and both candidates’ negative perceptions are driven up, who benefits? Notwithstanding the advice that he has gotten from nearly every quarter, I’m not sure the answer is Coleman. Wellstone’s negatives are already high, and political ads aren’t likely to dent his solid base of support. Mud thrown at Coleman, on the other hand, may dissuade swing voters who are prepared to vote for someone else–especially after Wellstone broke his two-term pledge–but may conclude Coleman isn’t the man.
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.