# The Dirty Trick **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 3, 2010, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000 "2010-08-03T13:18:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/21 "2010-08-03T16:36:24Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > **tom** , understanding the nature of a problem has _everything_ to do with a discussion of how to respond to it. > > Dirty tricks are used because they work, and they work because a significant number of voters let them work, and because too much of the media is too tame to investigate and report on them. There is no solution to be found in the legal system; it’s too slow to provide a response before Election Day, after which it no longer matters. What we need are better media and better citizens; nothing else will do. Not only do they work they work better for conservative candidates. Most would think the proper response to a dirty trick would be to debunk it for the bullshit it is. As it happens debunking seems to increase a person’s belief in its truth (some liberals do too but moreso for the conservative mind). Truly astounding…show someone something is provably false and they become even more committed to its truth. > [@](#): > > In experiments conducted by political scientist John Bullock at Yale University, volunteers were given various items of political misinformation from real life. One group of volunteers was shown a transcript of an ad created by NARAL Pro-Choice America that accused John G. Roberts Jr., President Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court at the time, of “supporting violent fringe groups and a convicted clinic bomber.” > > \ > > Bullock then showed volunteers a refutation of the ad by abortion-rights supporters. He also told the volunteers that the advocacy group had withdrawn the ad. Although 56 percent of Democrats had originally disapproved of Roberts before hearing the misinformation, 80 percent of Democrats disapproved of the Supreme Court nominee afterward. Upon hearing the refutation, Democratic disapproval of Roberts dropped only to 72 percent. > > Republican disapproval of Roberts rose after hearing the misinformation but vanished upon hearing the correct information. The damaging charge, in other words, continued to have an effect even after it was debunked among precisely those people predisposed to buy the bad information in the first place. > > Bullock found a similar effect when it came to misinformation about abuses at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Volunteers were shown a Newsweek report that suggested a Koran had been flushed down a toilet, followed by a retraction by the magazine. Where 56 percent of Democrats had disapproved of detainee treatment before they were misinformed about the Koran incident, 78 percent disapproved afterward. Upon hearing the refutation, Democratic disapproval dropped back only to 68 percent – showing that misinformation continued to affect the attitudes of Democrats even after they knew the information was false. > > Bullock and others have also shown that some refutations can strengthen misinformation, especially among conservatives. > > SOURCE: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402375\_pf.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402375_pf.html) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/22 "2010-08-03T16:41:07Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I merely note that the OP chose his own side of the political spectrum for examples of bad actions, (so that there would not be claims of partisan cherry picking of examples), then asked that the issue be debated, not the politics. I merely note that it would be a far better start to such a discussion to be bipartisan about it, even artificially. I’m sure the OP realizes that as well, and perhaps you do too. > [@](#): > > If there is a way to reduce dirty tricks, then let’s address that rather than simply wandering around saying “_if we ban the other side, the dirty tricks will go away_.” No one has said anything even suggesting “banning the other side”. Come on now. :dubious: The OP specifically refuses to discuss one side _cleaning up its act_. But, as I already said, if the facts point to that being at the nature of the problem, it is \*necessary \*to discuss it - refusing to do so would be exactly the partisan sniping you purport to deplore. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/23 "2010-08-03T16:41:55Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > A democrat in Maine illegally leaked records about Bush’s DUI days before the 2000 election. Was that a dirty trick or a legit new story? Did he have a DUI? Were the records false or recklessly misleading? Then no, it was not a dirty trick, and even if one assumes that the illegality of the leak were just, it’s still not as bad as constructing deceptively inaccurate propaganda. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/24 "2010-08-03T16:42:03Z")
> [@](#): > > So, too, here. We seem to reward dirty tricksters, even though we piously claim their tactics are not appropriate. There’s a selection effect, here: We don’t reward all dirty tricks, just successful ones (tautological, of course, since “successful” is defined as the ones that we reward). It’s just that the successful dirty tricks are the only ones that get much media attention. As for other examples, what party were George Smathers and Claude Peppers (he’s an acknowledged Homo sapiens, his sister is a thespian, etc.)? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/25 "2010-08-03T16:44:05Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Most would think the proper response to a dirty trick would be to debunk it for the bullshit it is. As it happens debunking seems to increase a person’s belief in its truth (some liberals do too but moreso for the conservative mind). Truly astounding…show someone something is provably false and they become even more committed to its truth. What’s astounding? The more something gets mentioned on “the news”, the more impression is created that it is factual, or that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire, so there must be something to it”. That’s true even when you have media reports tacking on “The other side denies it” as a token nod to this “neutral report of the facts” stuff that old fart back at J-School yammered at them about. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/26 "2010-08-03T16:46:14Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Did he have a DUI? [Yes.](http://transcripts.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/02/bush.dui/) And Cheney had 2. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/27 "2010-08-03T16:51:23Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The OP specifically refuses to discuss one side _cleaning up its act_. But, as I already said, if the facts point to that being at the nature of the problem, it is \*necessary \*to discuss it - refusing to do so would be exactly the partisan sniping you purport to deplore. Actually, this is the sort of doublespeak partisan nonsense I was hoping to avoid, but you simply will not let it go. The point of asking that the thread not be slanted to telling one side to clean up their act is to address the entire issue. By you trying to re-focus on addressing only one side, you are avoiding the overall issue so that you can pretend that only “their” guys do it. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/28 "2010-08-03T17:09:48Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > It seems hard to credit Rove with having so little control over the campaign that things like that fly below his radar. Even if someone else did it without Rove knowing ahead of time it is the system Rove set up which seems to allow such things with a wink and a nod that he can credibly say he knew nothing about. This assumes that it was done by someone in the “Bush campaign”. But there are a lot of independent political operatives who have their own interests in mind. What’s your evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/29 "2010-08-03T17:23:46Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > As for other examples, what party were George Smathers and Claude Peppers (he’s an acknowledged Homo sapiens, his sister is a thespian, etc.)? Both were Democrats - the race was the Democratic primary for U.S. Senator from Florida. And while this particular incident didn’t actually happen, Smathers did mercilessly accuse Pepper having pro-Communist leanings. This was retaliation for Pepper’s support of a dump-Truman effort among Democrats in 1948. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/30 "2010-08-03T17:28:08Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > > > It seems hard to credit Rove with having so little control over the campaign that things like that fly below his radar. Even if someone else did it without Rove knowing ahead of time it is the system Rove set up which seems to allow such things with a wink and a nod that he can credibly say he knew nothing about. > > This assumes that it was done by someone in the “Bush campaign”. But there are a lot of independent political operatives who have their own interests in mind. What’s your evidence? Common sense/Occam’s Razor. For it to be otherwise you have to think someone in the McCain campaign had the bright idea to trash McCain which would then have the effect of enraging Carolina voters (who are totally cool with candidates having out-of-wedlock interracial babies) such that they will rebel against Bush and vote McCain. That’s so preposterous on the face of it I do not recall even Rove making that accusation (and he is hardly a guy to shy away from such things). Where’s your evidence it was a hit job by McCain supporters? ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/31 "2010-08-03T17:29:28Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > As for other examples, what party were George Smathers and Claude Peppers (he’s an acknowledged Homo sapiens, his sister is a thespian, etc.)? Problem is, both Smathers and Peppers denied that famous “dirty trick” ever happened. And it didn’t. It was a hoax made up by a bored reporter. > [@](#): > > The story wouldn’t die, nonetheless, and it deserved not to. According to the yarn, Smathers had a little speech for cracker voters, who were presumed not to know what the words meant except that they must be something bad. And from [this article on Smathers](http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/29/State/A_born_winner__if_not.shtml): > [@](#): > > Smathers offered $10,000 to anyone who could prove he said (those words), with no takers. Now he shakes his head and acknowledges the falsehood as part of his legacy. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/32 "2010-08-03T17:33:40Z")
The truth is more interesting than fiction in the Smathers-Pepper incident. Smathers was recruited to take Pepper down by Truman, and did so by calling him a Red over all of Florida’s counties in 1950. ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/33 "2010-08-03T17:41:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have deliberately mentioned Republicans, here, and not Democrats. That is not to say that Democrats don’t have dirty tricksters, too. There’s no way you’d let anybody get away with that in a Great Debates thread without some evidence, **Bricker**. Spill, or that throwaway phrase seems dangerously close to a reportable post. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/34 "2010-08-03T17:47:47Z")
Well, I would regard the “Burkett memos” to be a dirty trick - though one that backfired on CBS rather than helping any campaign. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/35 "2010-08-03T17:56:22Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > For it to be otherwise you have to think someone in the McCain campaign had the bright idea to trash McCain The McCain campaign? 😕 I specifically suggested “indepenent political operatives who have their own interests in mind”. To make it simple, if that helps, there are generally a lot of people other than a candidate and his/her campaign employees who have an interest in the outcome of political races, and they frequently take action on their own initiative. Surely you must be aware of this type of thing, if you follow politics even slightly. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/36 "2010-08-03T18:35:44Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > > > For it to be otherwise you have to think someone in the McCain campaign had the bright idea to trash McCain > > The McCain campaign? 😕 > > I specifically suggested “indepenent political operatives who have their own interests in mind”. > > To make it simple, if that helps, there are generally a lot of people other than a candidate and his/her campaign employees who have an interest in the outcome of political races, and they frequently take action on their own initiative. Surely you must be aware of this type of thing, if you follow politics even slightly. > > Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. Geez… Fine. Point is the effort was meant to smear McCain and not in some brilliant piece of reverse psychology give McCain a bump by smearing McCain but making it reflect worse on the Bush campaign. More likely is someone was trying to help Bush. It was something that, when asked, Rove repudiated and said he had nothing to do with. That despite Rove being a control freak and that despite Rove, while distancing himself from it, did nothing to put a stop to it. It’s like a mafia don. He lets it be known he really wants that other guy gone (wink/nod) then claims innocence when someone…who knows who…puts a bullet in that guy’s head. Mafia don shrugs and truthfully claims he knows nothing about it. Neat trick albeit an old one. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/37 "2010-08-03T19:04:31Z")
The point is, Rove may have controlled the entire Bush campaign, but he didn’t control everyone who supported Bush. The push-polling could have been done by a supporter of Bush who wasn’t part of the campaign and wasn’t under Rove’s thumb. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/38 "2010-08-03T19:13:51Z")
I don’t think you can stop negative campaigning or dirty tricks so long as people care more about “character” than they do competence. To someone evaluating a politician on the issues, and their proposed solutions to problems, having a Black baby, cheating on your wife, doing coke, etc. doesn’t matter nearly as much. I’m not so sure people are willing or able to look past those things though. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/39 "2010-08-03T19:28:03Z")
> [@Duke](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > I have deliberately mentioned Republicans, here, and not Democrats. That is not to say that Democrats don’t have dirty tricksters, too. > > There’s no way you’d let anybody get away with that in a Great Debates thread without some evidence, **Bricker**. Spill, or that throwaway phrase seems dangerously close to a reportable post. The whole point of my painting only “my side” in the OP was to avoid this kind of nonsense, but at the same time acknowledge that the answer to my question shouldn’t simply be, “Republicans need to clean up their act.” But fine. Burkett’s memo, as Mr. Moto mentions. The “Nixon Deed,” incident during the Kennedy-Nixon elections. The smashing of the Denver Democrats’ headquarters, blamed on the right wing but actually committed by a Democrat. Salon’s claim that George Allen used the n-word at college, and gave a friend the nickname “Wizard,” because the friend shared a last name with a KKK leader. Both sides do it. What’s the answer? More specifically, I propose strengthening libel laws. What say you? ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000/40 "2010-08-03T19:44:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What’s the answer? More specifically, I propose strengthening libel laws. What say you? I don’t say anything, I was just surprised by your offhanded comment that “of course, the other side does this too, but I won’t mention names.” Of course I am shocked, _shocked_, that politicians might try to do some dirty tricks. I mean, we hold them in such high esteem! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-dirty-trick/549000.md?page=3)