Start the conversation
With the election 2016 race tightening, political attack ads are becoming more vicious - and more misleading.
As voters, it's hard not to get caught up in all the emotions these ads can generate. After all, it's your chosen candidate that's often under attack or being mischaracterized.
As of the end of August, Hillary Clinton's camp has spent $141 million on political attack ads; Trump's has spent $46.7 million, according to Bloomberg. (The 2016 election cycle as a whole, including the primaries, is expected to see a total of $4.4 billion spent on political TV ads, according to Kantar US Insights.) Swing states like Iowa, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia have been most aggressively targeted so far.
But rather than passively viewing these ads - and being subjected to their exaggerated claims - we've developed three strategies to help you become an active viewer. That means being able to sort what's right and wrong in these ads - quickly.
Watch our video below to learn three tricks to not be manipulated by political attack ads:
- How Big Money in Politics Bought a Presidential Election - in 1896
- What Is a Super PAC?
- Why Clinton's Fundraising Beats Trump's - Even in Republican-Dominated Industries
- Why Trump's Fundraising Lag Gives Him Unprecedented Edge Over Clinton (Yes, It's Counterintuitive)
- Dark Money Part 1: The Rise of Super PACs