Friday, July 1, 2011

Brilliant move by Binnie?

September 2, 2010 by ShawnMillerick  
Filed under News & Politics, Uncategorized

When Bill Binnie announced last week that he was pulling his negative ads and going positive, most people dismissed it as an empty promise. However, Binnie seems to have followed suit and as of this morning, he has not aired any negative ads attacking his main opponent, Kelly Ayotte.

It has become an article of faith amongst all of the campaigns that negativity has become the third rail of GOP politics this cycle. When Binnie went negative on Ayotte, his ads blew up in his face and seriously damaged his campaign. Since then, the supporters of every campaign have made it clear that they want their candidates to be positive and the campaigns are wary of incurring the wrath of the voters. They also feel that with such a potential backlash, negative ads won’t be very effective as voters will just discount them, and they will do more damage to the person running them.

Binnie’s run of positive ads may have started to improve his image and begin to repair some of the damage he did to himself, but he still has a long way to go. Will he stay positive for the rest of the campaign? Some of his opponents are worried that he might actually be serious about a positive campaign, and if so, that he could actually be in a position to win this. However, if Binnie were to go negative again, any work he did to repair his image would be quickly undone and he would find himself slipping even further back.

Comments

2 Responses to “Brilliant move by Binnie?”
  1. Healer says:

    And just today is Mr. Binnie’s clarification of Ayotte’s really ignorant/uneducated attack. I hope you see how trite she is while the rest of the world is working constructively to make things happen…

    “Let’s make it clear: I did not transfer jobs from America to Mexico. My company was mistaken for another company with a similar name, which closed a plant in the same town.

    One more thing — Our company was growing, we did not need to reduce jobs.

    My company, Carlisle Plastics (under its subsidiary A&E Plastics), closed a plastic-hanger plant in Santa Ana, Calif. in 1990. The reason was the lease expired. Its size was around 100,000 sq. ft. It employed about 100 people. Its equipment was sent to several other Carlisle plants.

    We relocated to another plant seven miles away, also in Santa Ana – also about 100,000 sq. ft. Those 100 people at the old Santa Ana plant were offered jobs at the new Santa Ana plant on South Susan St. – most everyone took them, or went to work in other American plants owned by Carlisle Plastics. And we continued to have this same Santa Ana plant until the business was sold in 1996.

    The old Santa Ana plant was primarily manufacturing with some distribution facilities. The new Santa Ana plant was primarily distribution, and printing with some manufacturing.

    All the offical documents of my company confirmed that we had a Santa Anna plant throughout my tenure as chairman.
    The official records are clear – 10K and S1 forms filed with the SEC that I signed along with other Carlisle Plastics executives. Even the Union-Leader’s story by Garry Rayno (August 22) quoted these reports – and there was a Santa Ana plant listed for every year.

    So what about Mexico?

    Around the same time as the move of Santa Ana plants, we were constructing a new manufacturing plant in Tijuana, Mexico and expanding into the very important Latin American hangers. Some of the machinery from the old Santa Ana plant was sent to Tijuana—but no jobs. More importantly, all of the jobs were new, not transferred from anywhere else. (The shift of the manufacturing equipment, and the opening of the new plant, was duly reported to the SEC.)

    This Mexican plant did not open until early 1991 – several months after the shift of the Santa Ana plants. This is by itself more evidence that the Mexican jobs were new.

    Again – some old plastic-molding machinery was sent to Mexico, not jobs. Jobs stayed in Santa Ana, and then, months later, we opened a plant in Tijuana.

    The Union-Leader claimed that you closed a plant in Santa Ana and threw 450 people out of work, the jobs presumably going to Mexico.

    NOT TRUE. I never employed 450 people in Santa Ana, at any time. What happened is this:

    Our subsidiary was called A&E Plastics, and made plastic hangers. Another company, called A&E Systems, also based in Santa Ana, made awnings for recreational vehicles. This different company did close its plant in 1990. There was a news story in the Los Angeles Times from October, 1990, describing the loss of 450 jobs, which were being transferred to Indiana.

    Different company, not mine. We presented this error to the Union-Leader, and the author called us back to say that clearly there had been a mix-up, and the newspaper would be publishing a retraction. The publisher later overruled this, published a follow-up story but refused to retract this obvious falsehood.”

    Like what you hear? Support our campaign!You can find us on Twitter @Binnie2010Printer-friendly version

  2. Healer says:

    Kelly Ayotte is STILL airing negative ads which are absolutely outdated, baseless, lack ANY type of intelligent constructive political action from her mind whatsoever. I guess she’s having a bad hair month and hasn’t evaluated herself lately. Look in the mirror, Kelly. You’re letting those around you help you fail. It’s simple…Mr. Binnie’s opponents will publish half of sentences he speaks without finishing his statements for clarificaitons. So he will only have to finish the other half, saving himself a great deal of time. Attack=decay and Clarify=transcend: attack=decay, clarify=transcend…very simply for a man with so much clarity and well-articulated intellect.

    It’s time the journalists begin to behave like mature intelligent people who spent so much time and resource getting into the influential positions they have worked to hard to obtain by ASKING Mr. Binnie objective questions like, “Would you please clarify what they are accusing you of. But publish the ENTIRE response instead of half a statement out of context!” I believe this is a journalist’s responsibility and perhaps this is why certain readerships are diminishing. We the people simply don’t appreciate being force fed someone else’s pablum! We ARE intelligent enough to make up our own minds because we spend every day working terribly hard and every night searching our souls to be able to do the right things in life. Don’t you journalists think we deserve a little objectivity to help us decide who should be speaking firmly and intelligently on our behalf in Washington?! I’m sort of surprised at the integrity of Mr. Binnie’s brief but effective defensive ad campaign. He shows us that he’s not one to back down, but to defend. And when he does bite…he devours. THIS is the kind of strong and concise leadership I will vote for…not someone who was asleep at the wheel while Bill Binnie logistically brought his entire team to Le Mans twice and became a world champion…twice. He will succeed for us the same way he succeeds at nearly everything he puts his focus to.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.