McCrory and Perdue clash on attack ads

The moderator is now talking about third party ads. The first one they're watching is the ad by the Alliance for North Carolina (which I have posted in this blog) attacking Pat McCrory.

McCrory tells us that the ad is right in that he is opposed to free college tuition -- passes the truth test "by about 1/3". McCrory has never run a negative ad, neither in the primary, nor in the general election. McCrory is quoting an ad by Perdue back during the primary calling for positive campaigning and pointing out that she attacks him -- calls him a "threat to the middle class".

Now they're showing the ad by the Republican Governor's Association against Bev Perdue (I'll have to post that later) calling her "Status Quo Bev". Perdue is ignoring the ad and telling McCrory that she is against "negative personal attacks", not the ones she is airing now, apparently (it's not personal to call someone "a real danger"). Perdue is now telling us that she has "broken every status quo" she knows by being a female and running for office.

When pressed to see if McCrory will ask the RGA to pull the "status quo" ad, he says the are forbidden from communicating with the RGA and called the ad "silly". He does ask that Perdue pull the ad calling him a "real danger to the middle class". She refuses to do so, because "that's not a negative ad". She now apparently has a new one that says McCrory is "too extreme" for North Carolina.

Moderator is asking Perdue what she would have done differently in the Easley adminitration -- she's pretty much just saying that she is not a part of the Easley administration. She wants to be more "hands on" than Easley is, and "there are things that I really, really would do differently". What does that mean, Bev?