I made a comment on another thread about how candidates respond to invitations from hostile groups. It turned into bashing of a specific candidate, so I’m reposting it here, where I hope it can remain a general discussion. It was prompted by a candidate deciding not to attend a scheduled event when they realized the event was probably a set up from the other camp. Here’s the comment:
OK – I have a question. And this isn’t a smear or criticism of (candidate)
Why WOULDN’T you go into a hostile room?
Face it – if you are elected, you’ll be visiting a LOT of them.
Not objective? A backstabbing smear job? So what?
Bring your own video camera, and your own personality and attitude – and say I do/don’t agree, here’s why, and thanks for the opportunity.
A candidate can find LOTS of friendly forums, either invited or created – it’s how they handle themselves in the others that shows their ability to represent. This isn’t the old days, when the reporting of events ws controlled by a few in the media. A candidate now has the abiltity to create their own and objective record of who said what and when.
As I said, NOT a criticism of (candidate) – you have met these people, I haven’t, and she’s a smart woman. But instead of just the usual RMG bashing – why not have a discussion of a hypothetical, using this as an example. I waited until this was over so it could BE a hypothetical.
Oh, and stay classy, (group) – posting like this will REALLY make people want to speak to your group…
Yr. Obedient Servant, Peter Porcupine, Republican
Thu Feb 25, 2010 at 11:59:45 AM EST
So what do you think as activists, RMG? Should a candidate deliberately go into hostile territory? (I admit I am a fan of this).
What do you do when an event TURNS hostile unexpectedly, or you fail to realize it was a setup? Do you really need to record every event? (I admit I am a fan of this as well). Does recording an event destroy casual interchange and discussion? Is it worth it to lose that to protect the candidate?
Thoughts? (And please – try to keep it general, not about specific candidates, campaigns, or incidents.)[poll id=”