With the approach of today's Pennsylvania presidential primary - the first Democratic primary since March 11 - campaigning by both candidates has gotten aggressive.
Referring to a highly publicized comment recently made by her opponent, an advertisement endorsed by Sen. Hillary Clinton opens, "Barack Obama said that people in small towns 'cling to guns or religion…as a way to explain their frustrations….'"
The ad features men and women looking into the camera saying things like, "It just shows how out of touch Barack Obama is," and "The good people of Pennsylvania deserve a lot better than what Barack Obama said."
Sen. Barack Obama released an ad calling Clinton's recent ads "eleventh-hour smears paid for by lobbyist money."
The Pennsylvania primary, which experts expect Clinton to win, has carried increasingly more weight for both candidates, said Michael Heaney, a UF political science assistant professor.
A poll conducted Monday by Quinnipiac University found Clinton leading Obama 51 percent to 44 percent with a three-point margin of error.
For Obama, Heaney said, a loss to Clinton could undermine the lead he has established so far.
For Clinton, a win is necessary to maintain a reasonable hope of winning the Democratic nomination.
In the face of necessity, both of the candidates have turned to more negative campaigning, Heaney said.
While the ads seldom convince voters to favor candidates, he said, they can be successful in convincing them to second guess an on-the-fence decision.
The negative ads can also be attributed to the candidates' similar political stances, said Daniel Smith, a UF political science associate professor. These have led them to create ads that attack each other based on personal rather than policy issues.
Candidates have also taken advantage of each other's recent blunders, Smith said.
For example, while Clinton took advantage of Obama's comment about citizens of small towns, Obama capitalized on Clinton's unfounded statement that snipers attacked her when she was in Bosnia in the 1990s.
"Both have made the most out of those gaffes," Smith said. "It's easy pickings."
While in some sense, he said, Republicans should be pleased to watch the Democratic candidates criticize each other, Democrats might ultimately be doing each other a favor.
By the time a Democratic candidate is selected, presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain will seem like he is bringing up old issues if he attacks his opponent for shortcomings that have already been exposed.
Zachary Moller, president of UF's College Democrats, said he didn't find the ads offensive enough to turn him off to either candidate.
"It's not personal attacks. It's records on what they have said," Moller said. "This is a campaign. Stuff like this is going to happen in the fall."
But he did say he'd prefer it if the Democratic candidates would attack McCain instead of each other.
"I think that would be more productive, but I'm not running their campaigns," he said.
Though some have said the attack ads could drive Democratic supporters to vote for McCain, Smith said he didn't think it would happen.
"Even if they're not happy about it, they're less happy about the last eight years under George Bush," he said.
