Two political ads on the airwaves in New England tacitly concede the opposition's main argument but are nevertheless effective in undermining it. Sound counfusing? Let me explain.

First, the teacher's unions have bankrolled opposition to Question 1, the ballot measure that would repeal the income tax in Massachusetts. Their advert argument? Voting to abolish income taxes means voting to raise property taxes. It is, of course, a fallacious contention. Massachusetts has Proposition 2 1/2, a law limiting property-tax increases, on the books, and obviously only liberals would envision a tax increase as the only way to offset a tax cut. The television spot (see it here), however, demonstrates the popularity of lower taxes by forwarding an argument against tax cuts by claiming they would result in tax increases. Alas, many voters seem stupid enough to accept this liberal logic. There is something in the water in Massachusetts, and I'm not talking about flouride.

In New Hampshire, John Sununu Jr. is fighting for his political life. The Senate's youngest member is running ads tying his opponent to George W. Bush. This would be unremarkable if not for the fact that Sununu is a Republican and his opponent, Jeanne Shaheen, is a Democrat. The ad shows Shaheen bragging of her support for the Bush tax cuts and the Bush foreign policy. Her words came, of course, during happier days in W-land. Nevertheless, the ads effectively undercut Shaheen's strongest argument against Sununu: that he supported George W. Bush.