The latest TV ad from the Corzine campaign is out, and it's below. I spent part of the afternoon looking through all of the video the Corzine team has put together so far, and noticed a serious problem, and an opportunity.
Take a look at the ad below.
I think Corzine's handling of the economy is one of his strongest points and messages, but this is just too many words, and really weird music. And "But Chris Christie's soooo partisan..." is just a dumb line.
Now, check out the campaign's previous negative ad, and two negative web videos:
Same problem, right? Weird music (the last one awkwardly flipping to positive music for the Corzine campaign logo, kind of ruining the effect) grainy images, too many words on screen. And generally just the same old classic negative ads.
Some thoughts on these, and a change in approach, in the extended entry.
The problem I see is not just that the negative ads are poorly done. Perhaps the approach is off altogether. The Qunnipiac poll last week that showed Corzine down by a whopping ten points- even after almost two weeks of negative earned AND paid media pounding Christie over the $46,000 loan, the no-bid contracts to Bush cronies, etc. They showed not just terrible numbers for Corzine's ads, but terrible numbers for Christie's ads, too. And 63% call them regular campaign stuff for NJ politics. Something's not working.
In the same poll, Corzine had a 60% job disapproval rating, and 57% have an unfavorable rating of him. He leads by just 74-15% among Democratic voters. NJ is an overwhelmingly Democratic state, and my friends on the campaign tell me base turnout is important. Perhaps their strategy is to slam Christie repeatedly to draw those 15% of base Democrats away from him, or to make the 86% of Republicans who support Christie in the poll stay home. I'm not sure which. I am sure, based on opinions I've heard and the polling, that New Jerseyans are numb to these kinds of attack ads, especially the warmed-over, canned versions of it.
On the messaging, there are a few schools of thought. One is to attack Christie as the same old corrupt Republican and a horrible person, which seems to be the approach taken so far. Another is to communicate that Christie doesn't share your (Democratic) values, which works on the issues more. Another is to pump up Corzine and his record. Everyone I talk to in the state, political or not, tells me he has an image of a cold, corporate politician from Goldman Sachs. And if just 74% of Democrats in the poll say they are voting for Corzine, who is a very progressive Democrat in a pretty progressive state, that is a major problem.
I'm more inclined to a mix of the latter two. Contrast the negative ads with these positive videos. Check out this web video with Mayor Booker talking about how Corzine has helped Newark in education. It's authentic and amazingly normal. Check out this video on how New Jersey has the 2nd-highest number of wind turbine installations behind CA. It features a regular Joe union contractor and a number of other folks talking about solar energy in simple terms. It too is authentic, with great music and images. Hell, even this video of his running mate, Loretta Weinberg, quoting Popeye, "I am what I am, and that's all I am. I am a feisty Jewish grandmother from Bergen County" is great.
This kind of stuff reaches your Democratic base, and especially energizes progressives, like the selection of Weinberg for Lt. Gov. It's also far better quality. I know it's hard to get these into 30-second spots, but the relentless all-about-Christie approach doesn't always bring the base out to hold their nose and vote for Corzine.
It doesn't mean you don't do entirely negative advertising. And there are independents who have a positive opinion on Christie. It means you perhaps do negative advertising on the issues and values rather than on the corruption and persona, which so far isn't working. It also means you do negative advertising that people aren't completely numb to. I'm generally loathe to spend gobs of money on advertising that people end up muting anyway. I would rather spend- especially in a place like NJ, with insanely expensive advertising- on ads that are innovative, out of the box, and get people talking about them. The YouTube versions get forwarded. None of the negative ads are like that so far, and it's something that has to change.
STATE BLOGS
