1. SpaceyG says:

    Wow. He already has over 700 profile views too. Took me about a year to get to that point on my first blog. Then again, I didn’t have a previous life as a notorious blog troll!

  2. Doug Deal says:


    Running a blog is a marathon not a sprint.

    That letter from a supporter of your opponent was ridiculous. Republicans wonder why people are jumping ship or at least curbing their enthusiasm for the party, it is jerks like that need to be ostracized from the party permanently.

    Anyone with such a patronizing attitude probably encourages more people to support than oppose you.

  3. Politics is comical. Mud slings no matter how you try to cover the fact you’re slinging mud.

    A positive approach is to not sling any mud, but yet he takes a stab at his opponent on his “positive” site:

    “It is unfortunate that my opponent’s campaign manager seems determined to run a negative campaign. Our city and her citizens deserve better!”

    Well, so much for positive. Better add water to the mud hole…it’s very hot in Georgia and you don’t want it to dry up.

    Is it possible to be in politics without pointing out negative things about others? I doubt it.

  4. Doug Deal says:


    There is a big difference between comparing yourself to your opponent and tearing down your opponent. But I would expect that someone who is only skilled at tearing people down doesn’t understand that.

  5. drjay says:

    wow you really have to be an imaginative reader to read mud into what is essentially a response to an attack and not an attack itself–and a relatively benign response at that–it is not even directed at the candidate per se–but at someone working for the candidate–but whatever…

  6. I’m not saying it’s wrong or right. How do you campaign if you don’t bring out what’s wrong? You can’t.

    You have to compare or people won’t know who to vote for or who not to vote for. It’s just kind of funny how it was worded as positive when it points out a negative.

  7. Tommy_a2b says:

    Bull, my 2 cents are this. Politics is the same as a fist fight. There is no such thing as a fair fight. If you go to fight be ready to fight. A positive only campaign will get you an a$$ beat’n. Give it all you got hit hard and win.

  8. Bull Moose says:

    Savannah deserves better than a negative campaign and I’m not going there. Sorry, not going to do it. I will respond when attacked but I’m not going to participate in maligning my opponent’s name or reputation. This is a campaign based on issues.

    That’s what Savannah deserves and that’s what I’m going to deliver.

    Sometimes you have to stand strong in what you believe in. If more people did that, trust me, people wouldn’t view politics with such disdain.

  9. Tommy_a2b says:

    Well brother Clint, I admire your stand but when you react to being punched it is always harder than laying it to ’em first. Come out with some hard hitting issue and make ’em react to that. Best of luck. If I can drag myself all the way down there I’ll be glad to walk street for ya. I can make calls from here.

  10. dingleberry says:


    Why don’t you just stick to what you know best?

    The only way we’d need your “service” in Savannah is if we needed to buy a house. So, if I need to buy a house, I’ll call Bull Moose.

    If I need to save myself and other taxpayers money…well…dear Jesus, I hope you lose.

  11. Donkey Kong says:


    Just be smart. Look where Whitehead got by never attacking his opponent. There are some parts (NOT ALL, by any means, but there are some) of a candidate’s life that the public should know. If the media isn’t bringing it out, and the public doesn’t know, its your job (IMHO) to make sure the public knows what they need to know. As long as your emphasis remains solidly on the positive, bringing up certain important and relevant aspects of your opponent is not running a negative campaign, it’s part of proving that your a better candidate.

    i.e. if your opponent was arrested, had a recent bankruptcy, etc., the public should know. I’m not talking about Cagle’s “Reed caused forced abortions in some Island nobody knows about” crap that just wasn’t true (yes, Cagle, you lost MAJOR points for that). If there is a relevant negative point about your opponent that nobody is talking about, bring it up. Reed also ran a more positive campaign by miles than Cagle, and he lost too.

    Be wise, be smart, and be ethical. By all means, do what is right. Sometimes being ethical, though, is pointing to something bad your opponent has done and distinguishing yourself from him/her.

  12. Donkey Kong says:

    Let me clarify. If you’re opponent is a Republican, err FAR on the side of running completely positive. If you’re opponent is a Democrat, then it’s your job to show your opponent for who he/she really is. Under both circumstances you are completely honest, but if you’re opponent is a Republican, you shouldn’t talk bad about him unless he’s a Calvert-esque embarrassment to the GOP.

  13. Bull Moose says:

    My opponent is a Republican, but regardless, I’m running a campaign that people will be proud to support.

  14. Donkey Kong says:

    People were proud to support Cagle despite his horrid personal attacks against Reed. Don’t ask me why.

    Regardless, Cagle did a fantastic job as Lt. Gov. up until the fiasco with the Governor, and he continues to prove himself to be the Governor’s lapdog.

    Anyway, Bull, I am proud to support you regardless. You’ll do a fantastic job.

  15. Bull Moose says:

    Thank you. I appreciate that.

    Remember, Cagle didn’t attack Reed, he just pointed out about Reed’s problems with Abramoff.

    Anyway, that was last year!

Comments are closed.