This is a Boring Ad and I Like It. Am I Wrong?

by: tremayne

Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 12:46



This ad is actually airing, not just online. Two-minute ads are very expensive to run. This tells me: 1) Obama's is having a good September. This good? We'll see; 2) The campaign believes this moment, when financial nerves are frayed, is one where reassuring voters you've got a plan may actually win the election and justify the expense.

The ad is not flashy but it's anti-flashiness actually draws your eyes to the screen because how often are voters just talked to in a reasonable fashion?

Maybe it's just boring and I'm too willing an audience for it. What's your take?
tremayne :: This is a Boring Ad and I Like It. Am I Wrong?
');
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
This is a Boring Ad and I Like It. Am I Wrong? | 77 comments
I like it too (0.00 / 0)
OH and by the way… McSame is the MOST reprehensible of the Keating 5

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com…

 
I also like it, but (4.00 / 1)
as someone who works in Hollywood, I would use some editing to give you more eye candy as Obama discusses his ideas. Instead of staying on Obama for 2 minutes straight, I’d cut in stock footage of Wall Street, dollar bills being printed, foreclosure signs, Iraq, etc. You’d still have about a minute total on Obama himself, but the visuals would accentuate the message and make it easier on the ADD crowd.

Just my two cents.

Old Man McCain – Hatin’ on McCain since 2008.

[ Parent ]  
As an example (0.00 / 0)
When you watch those T. Boone Pickens ads, he mixes talking to the camera with stock footage shots and statistics. It makes the ads much more powerful and memorable than if it was all Boone, all the time.

Old Man McCain – Hatin’ on McCain since 2008.
[ Parent ]  
No, because it's a reassuring ad (4.00 / 5)
It reminds me of Roosevelt’s fireside chats (ok, what my mother told me about how reassuring they were–I was 3 when he died).  This is when Obama’s cool and calm demeanor is just what we need.  This isn’t a time for anger, except of the white-hot kind, which he does.  It is a time to tell people that he understands and above all he has specific ideas for how to fix things, ideas that people can understand.

He needs to follow it up with some more shorter, punchier ads on specific aspects–like one that talks about bringing back the refs and levelling the playing field so there are rules for everyone, not just the little guys, and one that talks about how McCain opposed every attempt to regulate the financial markets over the past 25 years.

But right here, right now, as the Dow fell about 1000 points in a week, this is just what is needed.

John McCain–He’s not who you think he is.

 
Same impression I got (0.00 / 0)
It is a calm and reasoned voice in the midst of a storm.

I think it is appropriate considering the current economic crisis and very Presidential. And, smart in its outreach to swing voters.

It exhibits Obama’s leadership qualities that McCain does not possess.

[ Parent ]  
Exactly (0.00 / 0)
Even if you’re bored and not really paying attention, you get the gist that Obama is a calm, authoritative guy who cares about you.
[ Parent ]  
Yeah, I like it (0.00 / 0)
This boring ad is better than his other boring ads–didn’t he run one like this before winning Iowa? It takes advantage of his strongest asset: his believability. And this kind of ad would be likely to increase voters’ “comfort level” with him, which the smart set keeps telling me is a problem.

One complaint, my perpetual complaint:

WHERE IS THE ISSUE OF TRADE?

He’s completely dropped the issue except when he’s talking to unions. No mention of NAFTA or other trade deals. The other day he had a great line about McCain not putting his country first when it comes to trade–does he think that’s too hot for a general audience? If so, he couldn’t be more wrong. This ad doesn’t even include his standard line about not giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas.

What gives? Does he not want to win Ohio? Does he just not want to win? 13 percent of the country support NAFTA and he’s running against a fanatical free trader!!

It tells me that right now the Rubinites in his camp have the upper hand

 
David, have you seen this ad? (0.00 / 0)
I didn’t pay attention too closely, but I think they threw in some trade-based attacks on McCain.  

Link to ad.  TPM says it’s “running in Pennsylvania and in other key states” (it’s about a Corning plant that closed in PA).

[ Parent ]  
Thanks for that (0.00 / 0)
I hadn’t seen it.

Yeah, I guess they’re using trade in a targeted way. Better than nothing, but I still think it should be part of a national message. NAFTA is unpopular everywhere.

[ Parent ]  
Brilliant (0.00 / 0)
A calm, reassuring voice in the middle of the storm. Obama’s media team proves their skill once again.

Barring outright election theft (not unheard of by republicans – see florida 2000 or Ohio 2004) Obama should have this one all sewn up.

 
great ad (0.00 / 0)
if talking to the electorate as if they are adults this ad will do well, if not, well you know.
 
Good Ad, Could Be Even Better Down the Road (0.00 / 0)
This is a pretty good ad and I think could become a pretty great ad if Obama starts hammering McCain’s temper and volatility down the road.

The specifics of the ad matter less than the atmospheric Obama’s steady coolness, and if he’s able to contrast that demeanor effectively against McCain’s hotheadedness, I think that could go a long way toward making Obama the safer choice in this election.

 
Too long (0.00 / 0)
cut it down to 45 seconds.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
 
Lose the reference to his web site (0.00 / 0)
Other than that, it’s a great ad — calm, reassuring, substantive, and clear.
 
Why? (4.00 / 2)
It gives people somewhere to go for more specifics. I don’t see any problem with that.

As you may recall T. Boone Pickens puts up a link to his website on his ads.

Old Man McCain – Hatin’ on McCain since 2008.

[ Parent ]  
it cuts away at the "Obama is all talk, no specifics" (0.00 / 0)
He has up on the screen for a long time “go to this website for even more specific details about the plan I’ve been outlining for the past two minutes.”

John McCain <3 lobbyists
[ Parent ]  
i think there's a valuable subtext: "i have an actual plan" (4.00 / 1)
so even if people barely pay attention, they’ll still get that much.
 
I wish politicians did more ads like this. (4.00 / 3)
I don’t know if I’m typical, but I do respect when someone takes the time to sit down and say: “Ok, here’s the problem as I see it, and here’s how I think we can fix it.”  Even if I disagree with their assessment (I don’t in this case, I think it’s spot-on.) I at least appreciate when a politician treats people like adults.

This ad may come off as boring to some, I don’t know, but I’m not sure that’s always bad.  Geico has had some amusing and interesting commercials over the years, but I’m still with boring old State Farm.  FreeCreditReport.com has insanely catchy tunes in their commercials, but they don’t make me want to use their service.

Maybe I’m in a minority, but I’m not sure that an economic plan should be sold in the same way we sell cereal.

 
If memory serves there used to be more ads like this (0.00 / 0)
At least more long ads.  Even some 5-minute ads.  And candidates might buy a whole half hour to talk to the electorate.  Soemwhere along the line, either with Nixon or Reagan, the 30-sec spot took over completely, to everyone’s detriment.

John McCain–He’s not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]  
it is a good ad (0.00 / 0)

and when the inevitable swiftboat attack ads start in full swing it can be pared down to the  “this campaign has been consumed by petty attacks and distractions that have nothing to do with you or how we get America back on track.”

The standard answer for all Obama surrogates when Rev. Wright, Bill Aires, Paris Hilton or pigs in lipstick are brought up should be something along the lines of
“I know John McCain is desperate to talk anything but how to fix the disaster he and George Bush made of our economy but the American public wants us to take these problem seriously.”

What has John McCain done for veterans?

 
once upon a time in the olden days (0.00 / 0)
presidents bypassed the MSM, pundits, spin and spoke straight to the American people when they had an important message to give. They would talk for 15, 20, 30 minutes. Everybody listened because back in the olden days the president was held accountable for his successes and mistakes. Back in the olden days all presidents talked like this. (but not as good as Barack)

Yes children it is hard to believe after 8 years of f*** you and doublespeak from the office of the president. Once upon a time the president was an adult leader who spoke to Americans like adults.

 
It's interruptive (4.00 / 2)
and works by being so different from other political ads. Obama’s primary campaign ads were successful by maintaining a brand identity. But the Obama campaign is now learning that you can’t run a GE campaign that way. Effective campaigns have to have a more varied mix of tone, pacing, and content. This ad is probably boring to most people and it appeals to only a minority of people who have the patience for it. But for that minority, it is a very persuasive ad.

McCain sides with Bush against war veterans
 
State of the Union message in 2 minutes (0.00 / 0)
It isn’t about getting undecideds to vote for him.

It is about getting his supporters to envision an Obama presidency and excited that yes we can do this.

People complain about the length but people who watch and listen will start to get comfortable that he isn’t Satan or some psychotic angry black man.

This is a very presidential ad.

 
remember these two? (0.00 / 0)


or the camera movement of this:



John McCain is dishonest
 
Can we quit with the Dukakis comparisons please (0.00 / 0)
They really are like chalk and cheese on almost every level.
[ Parent ]  
who is (0.00 / 0)
the cheese?

John McCain or Barack Obama?
[ Parent ]  
no offense (0.00 / 0)
i was talking about the camera movement and the slow dolly zoom.

eg.  i like this:
http://www.livingroomcandidate…
more than i like this:
http://www.livingroomcandidate…

i really don’t think you can hold a viewers eyes on a slow paced single camera shot.

and when the camera moves in time with a slow delivery, it is too slow

John McCain is dishonest

[ Parent ]  
I think the ad (0.00 / 0)
also reveals the confidence that is spreading in the Obama camp as everything appears to now be moving his way.
 
What I like about the ad (4.00 / 2)
Is that it’s a contrast to the typical commercials. People who are sitting there watching commercials and not paying attention might actually pay attention to this one because of its lack of glitz and its length. You can ignore a speech like this for 30 seconds, but if you’re going for 2 minutes, that’s something that’s gonna stick out in your memory and be retained for later.
 
I Likey (0.00 / 0)
I’m a big fan of this type of ads. I feel it will greatly appeal to independents and moderates. 20 million Ross Perot voters loved Ross’s infomercials. Remember those charts he’d flick through? My only suggestion is to cut it to a minute and focus on aspects of your economic plan. How about the national debt? Ross and his voters believe this was the number one issue in 1992. Tell voters we spend $60 billion more on interest during the Bush years. That’s $60 billion not spent on either energy, transportation, research, war, etc.

Another benefit, these ads make it easier for voters to size-up Barack’s character rather than the ‘soda’ ads.

 
It also works the war in (0.00 / 0)
Really makes the connection between spending $10 biullion a month rebuilding Iraq when we should be rebuilding the US.  It ties the war to the economic situation very well, which has to just send McCain up a wall.

John McCain–He’s not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]  
I'm a fan of this ad, too, BUT … (4.00 / 1)
… there’s one thing that could make this ad even better.  He’s clearly reading it, which is fine, but the personal connection of the ad and its calming effect would be enhanced if he were really able to stare deep into the lens of the camera.
 
stare (4.00 / 2)
without blinking…
[ Parent ]  
Two minutes – No contrast (0.00 / 0)
The ad’s pretty good … but I wish there was at least one contrast line/thought in there. They don’t even need to mention McCain by name — just something like “Now the same deregulation crowd that allowed this to happen is telling us they’ll fix it…”

This ad is a big reinvestment in their positive, transcendent Kumbaya campaign strategy … which I don’t have a lot of faith in…

 
Running more negative ads than McCain (4.00 / 1)
Not every ad needs to do everything.
[ Parent ]  
But every ad… (0.00 / 0)
…could do more than one thing at a time. It’s not either/or…

…Adding, decisions are made based on contrast and contrast could be used to reinforce the basic positive message.

[ Parent ]  
maybe (0.00 / 0)
the contrast is the obvious tone/seriousness of this ad compared to McCain’s

John McCain or Barack Obama?
[ Parent ]  
Wait you're both right (0.00 / 0)
Perfectly fine to have an all-positive ad.  Doesn’t mean you can’t have another negative, contrasty ad as well.  I think we need to have both.

It is not completely clear to me yet that McCain’s attempt to make this a “tough guy” situation is going to fall on its face without an additional kick in that direction from Obama.

I would hate to see this mini-bounce in the polls disappear.

Keep the pressure on.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
It's good, but it's not a total solution (0.00 / 0)
McCain is trying to steal the thunder by saying “I’ve faced tougher foes than Wall Street”.  His message is simple, direct, and only full of shit if you know the whole story.

In addition to this ad, there must also be ads attacking McCain on this massive flipflop, pointing out that the people he’s attacking are his friends and closest advisors as late as last week.  If not, there is some danger that the small bump Obama has seen in the last few days because of this will disappear.

This ad is obviously the campaign Obama WANTS to run, but it isn’t necessarily the one he NEEDS to run.  Both the high road and the low road are important here.  The McCain attempt to coopt this turf must be beaten back.  It is not self-evidently false to all Americans.

Beware our echo chambers.



sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

 
This is Obama in the zone …. (0.00 / 0)

This is Obama at his best, remember he started running as a Uniter, with all the sh*t recently he has definitely become more partisan Democrat.

Time for a run at the Middle Ground. I think people will appreciate this ad more than they would admire McCain’s bluster. McCain is saying “I…”, Obama is saying “We…”.

Remember, the economy is the top issue (of 40% of voters according to Diageo, with 8% choosing war). McCain leads Obama on “readiness to lead”, but by almost exactly an idenical margin Obama leads on “can understand me and my problems”.

Obama can build on that, come across as the sincere listener who can help (which BTW I think is his true persona) compared to McCain who is a bit of a blowhard.
It does echo Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats, and also (if you will pardon me) Ronald Reagan’s corniness and ability to connect to Americans.

Let Biden, Hilary and others keep up the attacks. I think Andrew Sullivan is right when he says Obama is at his best when he is above it all. He has shown that he can counterpunch, he can use his dukes when he has to. By all means let there be punchier ads with Hollywood production values, but the smoother the ads the more people feel manipulated.

More of the same, please, Obama campaign. Ok, maybe a bit shorter!

[ Parent ]  
If you were right (0.00 / 0)
McCain would not have gotten any bounce at all from their convention where all they did was pile on Obama.

Stop imagining that Obama needs to talk primarily to US.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
A week ago this would have met with universal dismay. (0.00 / 0)
Who is the audience?  

People who vote the issues aren’t going to respond to this – they’ve likely already decided, and will look up his plan anyway if they haven’t.

It isn’t strong enough or definite enough to be reassuring.  He is more like Carter than Roosevelt.

If he’s trying to get the blue collar white vote, I think he’s better off with stronger populism (eg, throw the wealthy cheats in jail, along with their big money allies in the government), rather than a long policy discussion, and bringing in Iraq may defeat his focus (some of those voters are pro-war).

To the extent it’s anti-negative ad, it’s like Dukakis.

A horrible ad.  


 I knew Incitatus. Incitatus was a friend of mine. Sarah Palin is no Incitatus!

 
I haven't quite gone as far as you (0.00 / 0)
but I share at least some of your sentiment on this.

I am okay with this ad, as long as this is not the main theme of Obama’s economic message, as long is it’s complemented by some attack ads pointing out why McCain is full of shit on this.

It is not at all clear to me that McCain’s “tough on Wall Street” approach is going to fail.

But this CAN’T be the whole approach or we’re going back to where we were last week.

Don’t let this be he-said she-said.  Keep hitting em HARD.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
It's already not "the whole approach" (0.00 / 0)
Both Obama and Biden have been absolutely pounding McCain as being wrong and/or full of crap all day, both yesterday and today.  They’ve also already put out that 30 second “Fundamentals” ad slamming McCain, which got praise here yesterday (at least in Quick Hits), just one day after there was some concern about how they didn’t have any attack ads out yet that were referencing all the economic crisis news that was starting to hit.

Now, if you’re just talking about how they should put out some more attack ads incorporating more of the McCain attacks from their speeches in the last couple of days, then yes, I agree, they should do that too.  But I think we have every reason to think they will.  

[ Parent ]  
Yesterday, yes. Today not so much. (0.00 / 0)
Until we know that the McCain “tough guy populist” approach has failed, we should assume that it may succeed and be ripping the hell out of it.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.
[ Parent ]  
I didn't hear Obama's Elko remarks (0.00 / 0)
But I just read the transcript and it looks very similar to what he was saying yesterday.  What differences did you notice?
[ Parent ]  
I see much less scorn for McCain and his philosophy (0.00 / 0)
more hopeful future, new jobs of the future.  That stuff is fine up to a point, but he should not be counting on the voters to realize what a flip-flop McCain is trying to make here.

If he pounds that home, he could be close to finishing McCain off.  He has him on the ropes.  Time to finish him off.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
Less scorn? (0.00 / 0)
“John McCain went on to say how angry he is at the greedy corporate interests on Wall Street. He’s so angry he wants to punish them with $200 billion in tax cuts.  And if they’re not careful, he’ll give them even more tax cuts for shipping our jobs overseas.”

I think you are being way over critical and looking for stuff to complain about.

[ Parent ]  
I'm not seeing the same thing (0.00 / 0)
Here are links for the two speeches:

Golden

Elko

At a glance, it seems that he spoke for quite a bit longer at Golden than he did in Elko, though I could be wrong.  But the balance between attacks on McCain and specifics about what his own plan will be seems about the same.  

[ Parent ]  
I'll concede your point and happy to do so (0.00 / 0)
See here.  

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.
[ Parent ]  
Upon reflection (4.00 / 1)
I coming to this point of view too. The overall message is length of ad means high-minded seriousness … and we all know how well high-minded seriousness works in elections…

The comparison is not only Dukakis, but also Stevenson — a long-winded, heady dissertation when simple and pithy is more effective. There’s nothing said here that couldn’t be reduced to 30-seconds, which would allow for many more placements/impressions … and would allow for some other negative/contrast ad tearing down McCain on the issue.

McCain’s ad is 100% horseshit, but it gets populism, positive McCain, negative Obama all in one 30-second package.

[ Parent ]  
Fine cut it down but trying different things is fine (0.00 / 0)
How many “negative” contrast ads like you describe has he unveiled in the last week or so? Maybe close to a dozen? A bit of positive does no harm and in fact should help as long as they keep up the attacks at the same time. Its a two-pronged strategy – tell people why the other guy is bad then say why you are good and what you are going to do. Thats the foundation of successful campaigns in my view.
[ Parent ]  
It's not either/or (0.00 / 0)
See here and here.
[ Parent ]  
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
No its both. Isn’t that what I said?
[ Parent ]  
But… (0.00 / 0)
…somehow calling for both in the same ad — or even just one contrast line within two minutes — is unworthy criticism.
[ Parent ]  
Right ok that works fine with me (0.00 / 0)
Why not try different things though. Some negative ads. Some positive ads. Some negative and positive stuff in the same ad. Weren’t you complaining before that there wasn’t enough diversity in the way they were going about their ad strategy?
[ Parent ]  
For all our arguments over the past hour (0.00 / 0)
somewhere up here you’ll see me saying exactly the same thing as you.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.
[ Parent ]  
I'd call it spirited discussion (0.00 / 0)
🙂
[ Parent ]  
No (0.00 / 0)
I was (and to a lesser extent still am) complaining about the low quality of creativity, production and messaging in their ads.  Some of the messaging is getting better, but they still lack creativity — the hooks that make an ad memorable and get free media — and are generally over-produced ‘typical political ad’ mushiness. Ironically, they make Obama look like the ‘typical politician trying to get elected.’
[ Parent ]  
Not unworthy (0.00 / 0)
Heck, you may even be correct.  But in my opinion calling out John McCain in this specific ad would have detracted from the ad.  This ad is supposed to make you think of President Obama, a man who knows what he is doing and confident in crisis, not Obama the candidate running against McCain.

[ Parent ]  
Not by name (0.00 / 0)
More generic. “Now the same old ‘regulation is bad for businss’ crowd who let this mess happen claims they’ll fix it.” Or some variant of this.

I’m not saying make it a negative ad — just include some contrast.

[ Parent ]  
Good god he's doing all this in other ads (0.00 / 0)
I can’t wait for the naysayers to start putting their money where their mouth is and start running their own campaigns then we will have 70 senators, 300 Reps and a lock on the White House for 50 years!
[ Parent ]  
There is too great a temptation (0.00 / 0)
to think that this little bump we’ve had in the polls means we can relax.

I heard Obama’s live speech from Elko, and it’s back to the high-minded, hope-spreading Obama, miles away from the sharp street-fighter he was in Golden yesterday.

It’s clear this is the kind of campaign Obama wants to run, and it’s clear to me at least, that it would be a mistake.  Now is not the time to ease up.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

 
Bull shit (0.00 / 0)
I saw it on Fox and he was attacking McCain fine. And nobody is relaxing. What ridiculous strawmen some of you come out with.
[ Parent ]  
Guess we saw it differently. (0.00 / 0)
Golden was golden.  Today, not so much.  

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.
[ Parent ]  
Did you see it all? (0.00 / 0)
I can’t believe you can differentiate between them.
[ Parent ]  
Evidently, I did NOT see it all (4.00 / 1)
I glommed onto Populista’s live link, but I must have landed there somewhere in the middle.

But then I saw this one, which must have happened before I came in on the live link.  This is much better, much more like what I’m talking about.

Happy to be wrong.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
Good (0.00 / 0)
Glad you’re back on the bandwagon. 😉
[ Parent ]  
I don't see from those who liked this speech (0.00 / 0)
any appreciation for the possibility that McCain’s “tough-guy populist” approach may work and change the game once again.  

I see lots of gloating at the logical inconsistency of flip-floppiness of that approach, but are you really sure that this will sink in with the voters that Obama needs to pull to his side?

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
Obama talked about that in the speech you just panned (0.00 / 0)
“But it sounds like he got a little carried away, because yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s President, he’ll take on the – quote – “ol’ boys network” in Washington.  I am not making this up.  This is someone who’s been in Congress for twenty-six years – who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign – and now he tells us that he’s the one who will take on the ol’ boy network.  The ol’ boy network?  In the McCain campaign, that’s called a staff meeting.”

Of course there is a possibility it could work. I don’t see any appreciation from you that the new Obama strategy will work either.

[ Parent ]  
I've been wrong enough times about Obama (0.00 / 0)
to know that I shouldn’t underestimate him.  So yeah, there’s a possibility that what he’s doing could work just fine.

But I’m not sure.  And so I’m picking up on it.  It may be that I’m wrong to be worried about the McCain tough-guy approach.  But it all remains to be seen.

sTiVo’s rule: Just because YOU “wouldn’t put it past ’em” doesn’t prove that THEY did it.

[ Parent ]  
You are correct to be concerned (0.00 / 0)
You are wrong to suggest that Obama isn’t on it.
[ Parent ]  
Obama today (0.00 / 0)
I didn’t see it, but from this it seems others disagree.  And to quote Obama today:

But it sounds like he got a little carried away, because yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s President, he’ll take on the — and I quote — ‘ol’ boys network’ in Washington. I am not making this up. This is someone who’s been in Congress for 26 years — who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign — and now he tells us that he’s the one who will take on the ol’ boy network. The ol’ boy network? In the McCain campaign, that’s called a staff meeting.

and

[Y]esterday, John McCain’s big solution to the crisis we’re facing is — get ready for it — a commission. That’s Washington-speak for ‘we’ll get back to you later’ Folks, we don’t need a commission to figure out what happened. We know what happened. Too many in Washington and on Wall Street weren’t minding the store. CEOs got greedy. Lobbyists got their way. Politicians sat on their hands until it was too late. We don’t need a commission to tell us how we got into this mess, we need a President who will lead us out of this mess — and that’s the kind of President I intend to be.

[ Parent ]  
Mix and Match (0.00 / 0)
As a reminder, this was the ad release just yesterday:

I think it is important that this new two minute ad lets Obama act presidential and beyond the partisan bickering he runs against.  There is definitely a segment of the population who likes the reassuring presence of the new ad.

But the negative ads are also important.  If the attacks stopped I’d agree with some of the more negative posts.  But this new ad does exactly what it intends to do, imo.

Play the ad I just reposted above and then view the new one; see how they play off each other.

 
Bad lighting – Too wordy (0.00 / 0)
The lighting on Obama’s face should have been better.  Did it bother anyone else that you could not see 1/3 of his face.

I thought it would be very hard for people to follow and remember what he said.  There needed to be more variance.  Maybe even an example, story or other variation to help you remember.  I had to work to follow what he said.  Other people will not put in the effort.

It would have been nice to put graphics/pictures to illustrate the points.  

Mentioning the plan on the web site is fine because it counters this “no substance” BS.

Overall OK – but don’t do it this way again. Please!!!

McCain on the minimum wage

 
Won't get much free media play (0.00 / 0)
John Cole makes a good point:
One thing is for sure, because it deals with substance and not lipstick or other bullshit, it will not get played for free repeatedly on the cable channels.

 
No he's cutting through the BS (0.00 / 0)
And going straight to the horses mouth. As tremayne said up top they must be having a good September on the fundraising front thus can afford it.
[ Parent ]  
This is a Boring Ad and I Like It. Am I Wrong? | 77 comments
Donate to Open Left
ELECTION 2008 Presidential Forecast
Senate Forecast
House Forecast
PREMIUM AD

ADVERTISEMENTS

');

MENU

OpenLeft in your inbox!

 

Or, subscribe to each author individually.
OPTIMIZE MCCAIN About
Tips
McCain
John McCain
QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

OPENLEFT VIDEO WALL
Donna Edwards Thanks OpenLeft


Russ Feingold on the New FISA Legislation


Jon Conyers on Impeachment


Al Franken Thanks Blue Majority


FCC Commissioner Michael Copps on Pearl Jam, Net Neutrality


Darcy Burner on the FISA Legislation

More OpenLeft video…

LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
BUSH DOGS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2024