How many of you had senators run campaigns based purely on mud slinging?

Did you see the difference in how McSally and Sinema ran their campaigns? Sinema never said a bad word about McSally- not in ads and not in discussions. The very first political as I heard this season was one of McSally's. It immediately poisoned me against her. I am dumbfounded she is winning.

I guess Ducey did the same to Garcia, but I never heard those ads. Ducey won too. 

I agree when it comes to track record; that's fair game. If a candidate says they stand for one thing and then repeatedly vote against that thing, people should know. 

Here's an example of what I mean:

Sinema was part of an anti-war protest. Fair enough. But, McSally made it sound like Sinema badmouthed the troops. Sinema never did. She comes from a military family and has a brother who is still serving. She was anti-war, but has shown nothing but respect for our troops. 

It's sad that this tactic worked. McSally should be ashamed of herself. All her ads were like this. She shouldn't be rewarded for that kind of behavior.

We are not gonna agree on this one. Sinema founded an anti-war group which put out flyers promoting their rallies with images that did put the troops in a bad light. 

This is her group she founded.....I do not see this as respectful to our troops. There is another with a tank getting ready to drive over protesters....again I do not see respect for troops in that. And her email is on that flyer. 


She has other issues she opposed as well but I will leave that alone. She lost so no need in beating dead horse. 

Sinema did not create or approve the flyers. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/15/politics/kfile-sinema-flyers/index.html

She founded the group and was still active in it at the time.....she gets credit.  Unless she can show she fired the person who approved the flyers...it falls on her. 

What we know of the signs is that she hosted a sign-making party right before an event. The flyer you shared was, in all likelihood, part of that. It could have been someone participating in the sign party at her house or it could have been some random person making it on his or her own time.

But, those flyers were not necessarily the ones distributed by her or any of the group's leaders. It very well could be ONE person's view of the situation, and that ONE person distributed the flyer he or she made. 

Imagine if I had hosted an answerMug ad-making contest. (We actually played around with new logo ideas as a site a few years back, so that has real potential.) And, imagine if one Mugger happened to make a design that was politically-charged. Now, maybe I didn't see that design or begin using it for the site, but the design got picked up on the net and was circulated. It would be easy for people to assume I was behind it, simply because it was our logo, but I could have absolutely no control over it. . 

Ok, even if she was completely unaware of the flyer. A promotional flyer used by the group. Not some flyer made by a ramdom member who may have simply stapled it to a telephone pole somewhere in AZ. This was used on the group's website, that is why we have a copy of it. It was archived on Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. She is the founder. She has some input in the site. She was the point of contact for the group. She has not said she has changed her mind or that she disagreed with the flyer in any way. 

She has been asked about it since and other statements about troops and she refuses to say it was wrong. 

I know if this was the case with a Mugger who make a sign that crossed a line, you would say you disagreed. But believed the person had the right to say it (or did not depending on who far it went of course)

No... these were not on their website. They are on an independent news site. The CNN article links the Wayback Machine for IndyMedia.org. The flyers were shared there as optional downloads. That is why we have a copy of it. We do not know who posted the article nor who added the flyers nor what their affiliation with Sinema's organization may have been. We have no evidence that the flyers were used by the group and they were not on the group's website. 

If you look at this page, there's a spot below the article that says "download the flyers" and the one you referenced is the first one: https://web.archive.org/web/20030220165010/https://arizona.indymedia.org:80/

After further digging, I can find quotes that explain lots of groups were involved in organizing that particular event, one of which happened to be an anarchist group. Nobody seems to know exactly who made or distributed the flyer. It very well could have been the anarchist group which was not affiliated with her organization, but took interest in her message and tried to get more people behind it.

I sometimes (not always) discuss what happens here on the site with people who are here, but I do not address what happens elsewhere. There are all kinds of posts around the net with inaccuracies about aM and myself. Sometimes people go to other sites and try to recruit as well. More than once, the OP has been accused of being me or of working for me. I don't go on those threads and say, "Hey, I didn't post this and don't condone this." I don't acknowledge anything said about aM or myself when it's posted off this site. Ever. Rumor mills and speculation are not my forte. If that same sign had shown up somewhere on the net with an aM logo, I would not have responded to it. I also come from a military family. I love our troops. I say this often. I make a point of thanking Muggers for their service when I become aware they've served. That is my record. I shouldn't have to debunk random signs that show up online. If people are accusing me of not supporting our troops, that's their problem. I know where I stand. I'd like to think the veterans who come to this site know where I stand. If they don't, there's little I can do to convince them otherwise. 

During this whole campaign, McSally was throwing out different accusations. Should Sinema have genuinely debunked every one? One of McSally's ads put quotes out asking whether Sinema said them or whether a child predator said them, and they came from a speech Sinema made regarding a proposed bill. Sinema was worried the initial bill would penalize people who genuinely did not know they were engaging with a minor. In the same speech, she admonished child predators. When the language of the bill was changed to ensure that people who knowingly had sex with minors went down and not those who genuinely believed they were engaging with an adult would face lesser penalties, she signed. But, the ads would have a person believe Sinema was feeding our children to the wolves and condoned predatory behavior.

Sinema should not have had to be defending all these meritless claims and frankly, McSally makes me sick. I now trust her as far as I can throw her. She won purely by smearing her competitor. She disgusts me. I think if more people were aware that the crap spewing out of McSally's mouth were lies, Sinema would have won. Hands down. Unfortunately, voters took the propaganda to heart. 

Ok I did not realize it was not on their site.

But still, if I was running yes, I would have personally said I do not agree with that flyer. I do not know who or where it came from but I do not agree with it.  She for some reason was not able to even say she disagreed with it. So yes, she is going to get saddled with it. 

I also disagree with the bill that gave sexual predators cover. I believe in statutory rape laws and ignorance is not an excuse. 

See, your last line there proves my point. You're choosing to say that you disagree with the political stance she took, and that's fine. McSally should have chosen that path. That's the high road. Instead, she opted to try to make it look like Sinema was a child predator. That's bogus. 

There was a different claim like this coming out every week or more from McSally. Should Sinema have come out and said she wasn't a child rapist too? Did she really have to address every nonsense claim McSally threw out there? If your answer to that is "yes," then we really are at odds on this one. 

It shouldn't be this way though. McSally played dirty. I'm tired of dirty politicians. And, that's not a partisan remark. I know dems play dirty too. I'm sick of it across the board. If McSally had behaved ethically, she wouldn't have won. That's just not right. 

In politics, you have to make a choice to either: deny, admit and apologize or claim it loud and proud. If you are silent or ignore/avoid people assume guilt. 

Also have to remember that not every (in fact in some races most especially if there is national interest) ad is tied to the candidates campaigns. There are many PACs who act on their own they are usually negative. 
I do know McSally ran some negative ads from her campaign. I also know McSally was hit with neg ads over her Obamacare votes. 
Maybe you will get another chance next time around.