- Joined
- Dec 6, 2015
- Messages
- 10,338
- Reaction score
- 6,031
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You mean since November 2016? Because it sure worked for Trump. With his middle-school insults and bullying he vanquished several high-level GOP politicians, and then Hillary Clinton thereafter.
For all our sakes, I hope you are correct.
I mean, let's keep it real, the bulk of Clinton's own efforts were chiefly reducible to attacks on Trump, and rarely emphasized substantive policy; something that cost her deeply in the rust belt/'Blue Wall', which were consequently left vulnerable to Trump's economic populism. They were both ****, unpopular candidates with **** negative campaigning. Moreover, even now, people, including our own focus groups, assert that the party stands for nothing but opposition to the guy:
ABC News: Majority of Americans Say Democrats Stand For Nothing Except Being Against Trump - Conservative Nation
https://www.axios.com/midterm-migra...813-bff84c4c-4e3c-4f46-a63b-84db98847614.html
What worked for Trump was not negative campaigning so much as the general weakness of his opponent and her own deleterious over-reliance on negative campaigning, among other missteps.