by Laura Strickler
STRICKLER
OPPOSITION RESEARCH
FEB. 20, 2004
INTRO
The race for the Democratic nomination got uglier this week when rumors of a John Kerry affair circulated on the internet. With only two candidates left in the horserace for the Democratic nomination, John Edwards is under the gun to go negative. Laura Strickler looks at what's at stake when a candidate takes the gloves off.
NARR
One of the trademarks of Senator John Edwards' campaign is his optimism. While other Democratic campaigns were taking potshots, Edwards stayed upbeat on the sidelines. At yesterday's campaign event in New York, Edwards revved up support for the upcoming primary. He also chided the press for nagging him about his refusal to go negative.
AX-EDWARDS
They ask me every single day when are you going to start attacking your democratic components, well let me be very direct with all of you and all of them, if you're looking for the candidate who's going to do the best job of attacking the other democrats, that's not me.
NARR
A supporter at the event, Julie Oh, likes how Edwards favors issues over insults.
AX-OH
You know I really believe that his positive outlook is the best way to go and I believe he'll really stick to it.
NARR
When races get close, it's more difficult to avoid attacking your opponent. Although the public hates it, research on the success of negative campaigning is mixed. A few years ago, a study from Ohio State University found mudslinging brings voters to the polls because they fear the bad guy will get into office. Eventually most candidate turns to consultants called opposition researchers to dig up dirt. Jason Stanford, a democrat, runs an opposition research firm in Austin, Texas. He's researched campaigns in over 30 states. He says Senator Edwards painted himself into a corner by refusing to attack his opponents.
AX- STANFORD
Now when he has to go negative, he'll appear to be breaking a campaign promise. I always tell my candidates not to do any positive campaign pledges, because it takes away a big chunk of campaigning.
NARR
Researchers like Stanford, use public documents to scour criminal records, tax filings and voting records for hints of hypocrisy. First he starts with his own candidate to make sure there are no surprises. Success is when the other candidate goes down. In a recent Tennessee congressional race, Stanford's research documented corruption by the Republican opponent. When details went public, Stanford's candidate won.
AX-STANFORD
It was beautiful, I was so proud and that's the funniest things about this business, I'm so happy about this and I just ruined someone's life.
NARR
Appetite for dirt often comes from his clients who urge him to look beyond voting records to sleaze.
AX-STANFORD
Almost every single race I do, if I'm researching a woman they tell me two things, one, she's a lesbian, and two she's a slut. and if it's a guy, typically, he's gay and then maybe he's a drunk.
NARR-
He says polls show that what really upsets voters is broken campaign promises. Personal revelations about a candidate, though distasteful, can alert voters to hypocrisy.
AX-STANFORD
Politics is not set up to reward the person who is most virtuous, or who makes the best points, it's set up to reward the person who gets the most votes.
NARR
In the presidential race, top research costs millions of dollars. Paul Abramson runs a GOP opposition research firm in Washington, DC. With the race getting tighter, frontrunner john kerry and president bush are already investing millions in research.
AX-ABRAMSON
You know we're going back and digging up things from 30 years ago and whether it's people talking about the president's guard service or these ridiculous photos surfacing of kerry and fonda , i think you're seeing that this is going to be a very nasty nasty presidential race.
NARR
Election day is still nine months away and researchers are busy scrubbing every corner of candidate's lives.
Laura Strickler, Columbia Radio News