Conventional wisdom is that negative attack ads work. The logic is that, if you attack your opponent enough and say terrible things about him, some of it is going to stick.

It happened with John Kerry in 2004 during the Presidential race, with the infamous "swift boat" ad. We're talking about a Vietnam War hero who was accused of embellishing his military record and betraying his Vietnam comrades by publicly protesting the war. Talk about cheap shots.

In 1988, Michael Dukakis lost the Presidential race largely because of one powerful, emotional ad put out by the Bush campaign. It was all about a guy named Willie Horton, a violent criminal who was paroled in Massachusetts— where Dukakis was Governor— and later went on to murder an innocent victim. The Bush ad attacked Dukakis for being soft on crime and coddling criminals like Willie Horton. The fact that more than half of the states that had early parole programs were led by Republican Governors was irrelevant. Dukakis was toast.

These are just two graphic examples of how negative attack ads can destroy a candidate's reputation with voters. Historically, it hasn't mattered if the attack is all that relevant to our lives. All that matters is that it makes the candidate look weak, less than honest, and the kind of person we don't trust to be President. Someone who is somehow not a true American.

But all that has changed in 2008. We're facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. People's portfolios are shrinking before their eyes. Wall Street is melting down, while Main Street is shivering. People are scared. People are looking for help. People are looking for answers and solutions. That's why today's attack ads are falling on deaf ears.

In different times, saying that Barack Obama was "palling around" with radical terrorists like Bill Ayers, who wanted to destroy America in the 1960s through the Weather Underground Organization, would be an effective attack. But that's not the case right now. In fact, the more Sarah Palin, John McCain and the Republicans attack Obama on the Bill Ayers stuff, the worse it is for them. It's becoming clear to most Americans that these attacks are a distraction we can't afford. What the McCain/Palin ticket doesn't understand is that their campaign playbook is seriously out-of-date. They only know one note, and that is to attack the reputation (as well as the patriotism) of their Democratic opponent. They've been doing it for years, and in many cases it's worked. It's classic character assassination. It's guilt by association. It's inferring that Barack Obama "isn't like the rest of us Americans" who see our country in a certain way.

But here's the catch. More and more voters— Independents and even some Republicans— are saying "I don't want to hear this crap." If Obama seems like he can help and talks specifically about the economy, his tax policies, and health care in a constructive and meaningful fashion, all of the other stuff is irrelevant. Being called the "L" word doesn't matter anymore. Most voters are saying who cares if Obama is a "liberal", or is hanging around with left- wing friends, as long as it seems he has what it takes to move us in the right direction. Sarah Palin doesn't get that. Carl Rove doesn't get it. Clearly, John McCain doesn't get it. The Republican establishment can't accept it, because they have no other card to play.

If this race were held today, Obama would win big. If the Republicans continue to use a cynical media and advertising campaign that tries to destroy Obama's reputation and character, my bet is by Election Day he will be on the verge of a landslide, and the Republicans will have no one to blame but themselves.