This diary is an attempt to create a benchmark. It can be argued, but nothing will really come from it, as it is what it is, as they say.
"The reality is it was a very respectful, very amicable campaign up until about a week ago, and now the campaigning has begun," said Wayne Lesperance, a professor of political science at New England College. "It's taken a more aggressive tone, and it's probably going to get worse."
As the candidates seek to distinguish themselves, each side will attempt to tie its opponent to negative associations, Lesperance said. Among the Democrats of the 2nd District, which stretches from the Canadian border to the Massachusetts border and includes both Concord and the Upper Valley, both pharmaceutical lobbying and the unpopular former president could resonate, he said.
With Kuster leading in endorsements and local support, the Swett campaign may have drawn attention to Kuster's lobbying ties in an attempt to get traction, said political analyst Dean Spiliotes. But once the bouts of criticism have begun, he said, they will likely continue up to the primary.
"At some point you forget who the initial instigator was, and it becomes this tactical back-and-forth between the campaigns," Spiliotes said.
Some will suggest that supporters, from one side or the other, were out there bashing away. But we all know supporters are not the campaigns. I have yet to see either campaign use a notable surrogate to throw bombs.
So there, Swett/Coffman started it!
P.S. I have no inclination to allow a Republican to take this congressional seat. Losing control of the House would politcally cripple the President. That said, in no way am I inferring that there is an equivalency between Kuster and Swett. The distinctions are clear, when you get up close and look under the hood. Any suggestion of equivalency is an effort to lull voters to sleep until primary day, when all they'll have to go by is name recognition.
Of course, in the general election, a looming sense of anti-incumbency forecasts the will of the electorate. And if we end up with a 2002 do-over, independents may just decide that they like the President to be from one party and the Congress to be controlled by the other. (shudder to think) It ain't the 1990s no more.
|
