http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/politics/omalley-attacks-clinton-gay-marriage/index.html
Here is another example of a political article that could be mentioned when talking about several different political topics and definitions. However, I have chosen to refer to attack ads when talking about this article. While this is an article rather than a paid for ad it is just a way of using free media to get an attack ad out to the public. The topic of this article is O’Malley attacking Former secretary Clinton and her views changing to appease to the voters. During a former press release Clinton voiced her opinion regarding gay marriage along with the topic of giving illegal immigrants drivers license. Her former position regarding these issues, was that gay marriage was considered unconstitutional and in her opinion it should remain as such. She previously said that illegal immigrants should not be granted the privilege to obtain a state drivers license. In a recent statement after announcing her bid for the democratic party election for president, apparently she has suddenly changed her position. While people are certainly allowed to change their views on certain issues, it may be construed by some that this is more of a political strategy rather than a change of personal beliefs. O’Malley has certainly taken advantage of Clinton’s change of heart regarding these two issues and attacked her character. I am of the opinion that he certainly should question her motives. These two topics are issues at the forefront of U.S voters at the moment and have been a hot topic for some time now. For her to change her stance suddenly and less than one week after her announcing her candidacy would lend itself to voters judging her character and understanding the validity of O’Malley’s attack on her.
Tony,
At this stage of the campaign it should come as no surprise that the candidates will be aggressively promoting their party’s agendas (even if they personallydisagreed in the past). While I agree with you that “flip-flopping” of Hilary’s position seems to be the case, you have to remember that she never said that same sex marriage should not be legal; she said she believed it was up to the States to determine (avoiding the issue altogether). Naturally, once a candidate will now be representing their party, it becomes imperative to be strategic. Having the support and backing of the LGBTQ Communities provides huge PAC funding; she would be remiss to ignore this fact and allow O’Malley to run away with their vote, and their money. Clinton will be a tough contender and O’Malley has not proven to be up to the task to overturn the Democrats’ support of her. Perhaps he needs to attack full on with more substantial arguments to eliminate her from the race; or perhaps, he knows he would be best to remain a “back seat,” in hopes of a Vice-Presidential nomination? Its all a strategic game and guess at this point.