"The study found that Romney's 'America Deserves Better' commercial was resonating with swing voters, moving 'pure independents' who remained undecided some 6 percentage points in the Republican's favor."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१७ टिप्पण्या:
Ouch. I can see why Obama hates Romney.
That man has Obama's number, and he's gonna push every button BHO has, until O does something extremely stupid.
But the man's still likable, right?
This man is despicable.
"Doesn't America deserve better" is exactly the right question.
It's a good ad, it exploits something that bothers a lot of folks in the middle. To wit, the fact that Obama will say things he knows are not true in order to satisfy political requirements of the moment. Like calling Chrysler bondholders speculators. It's time that swing voters faced that explicitly, and this ad helps them focus.
So, 39 % of Iowans are independent, and if we take as 6% who consider themselves truly independent and undecided, and 6% of that, you get .14% of Iowan likely voters who were persuaded.
I blame Obama's advisors and handlers for that.
He's a patsy.
Obama really has been plumbing the depths when it comes to sheer makin'-shit-up kind of campaign commercials. I guess there has to be a point at which even people who don't pay much attention realize he thinks they're just idiots.
There may be hope for this country after all.
A culture of "makin'-shit-up" starts at the top.
What I'm saying is... it's not Debbie's fault. Poor thing.
"I guess there has to be a point at which even people who don't pay much attention realize he thinks they're just idiots."
Based on 53% of the electorate voting for the most liberal AND least qualified person ever nominated by a major political party for the office of president, Obama is absolutely right in thinking they are just idiots.
Honestly, aren't they?
"There may be hope for this country after all."
Maybe. Too early to tell.
Get back to me the early Wednesday morning after the election. I certainly hope you're right, of course.
Dante: as they say, every vote counts.
Mike: Bless his heart, he believes he is still likable.
That's how you do an attack ad on this president.. use his own actions, or lack thereof, to speak for him.
Very well done.
Synova said...
A culture of "makin'-shit-up" starts at the top.
What I'm saying is... it's not Debbie's fault. Poor thing.
I'd go with "Bless her little heart" in the future.
As for the ad? It works for me, but I thought the ‘It’s OK to make change’ RNC ad had a better msg for indies
Sample Comments - This man is despicable or Obama really has been plumbing the depths when it comes to sheer makin'-shit-up kind of campaign commercials. I guess there has to be a point at which even people who don't pay much attention realize he thinks they're just idiots.
I still don't get it. Haven't both Obama and Romney and their respective teams engaged in all kinds of lies and manipulations? Many of the partisan commentators here seem to be bright people, based on many of their remarks and observations. However, what happens to their rationality and reality testing when it comes to politics? Is it not a form of self-deception when one accuses the opposition of such terrible and contemptible actions, yet not observe and denounce it in their own political protagonist? How can this be healthy. It would create all kinds of trouble if one functioned comparably in their work, family, or social life.
Dante,
Nice try. The article didn't say it ONLY moved the "truly independent and undecided", it said that it was the ONLY AD that moved such people.
Which is to say that Romney is the first person in this campaign to actually come up with an effective ad. Or, to put it another way, that Obama has been totally wasting all the money he's spent so far.
Not good news for the Democrats, since starting Monday Romney will be able to use that 50% more cash that he has in the bank.
What does a campaign want to do?
1: Get the base excited, willing to donate, volunteer, vote, and get their friends and family to vote.
2: Get those marginally attached to the campaign more attached
3: Move the undecideds to decide for the candidate
4: Get those marginally attached to the other candidate to switch, or at least stop being attached to the other candidate.
5: Depress the enthusiasm of the other side's base.
This study was about #3. And it found that the ad was a success at #3.
Was it a success at #1? Almost assuredly. "The other guy's a bad guy, and we can do better" is catnip for the base.
Was it a success at #2? Hi likelihood. "WE can do better, and you're with 'better'" is a message that works well with the marginally attached.
Was it a success at #4? Probably. The cancer stuff was total BS. It's embarrassing to be associated with something that sleazy.
Was it a success at #5? Probably not. The Democrat base is in favor of anything that leads to victory. The only "principle" they have is "we get our way." OTOH, it doesn't do anything to fire up the Obama base. (For example: an ad about how Obama wants to grow government, and make everyone more dependent upon the government, will fire up both sides bases, for their respective candidates. I don't believe that this one does that.)
In short, good ad.
marklewin says:
"I still don't get it. Haven't both Obama and Romney and their respective teams engaged in all kinds of lies and manipulations?"
Ah, the "everybody does it" defense. Your complaint requires one ignore two things: degree, and kind.
The steelworker ad is a flat out, baldfaced lie, from beginning to end. Romney wasn't at Bain when the guy was laid off (and one of Obama's big campaign bundlers was, so if it's anyone's fault, it's his, and Obama is using a killer to raise money), the wife had health insurance when he was laid off, and she was diagnosed w/ cancer six years later.
Obama's accusing Romney of killing an innocent woman, and the attack doesn't have a single shred of legitimacy.
What has Romney done that's even close to that?
SpecArriors against Obama (sorry, don't remember their real name) is running ads saying that President Obama has been endangering the lives of military personnel with national security leaks from the White House. So that would be the same kind of attack.
However, the fact is that the Obama White House has been leaking a great deal of national security information, that information is being leaked to enhance Obama's re-election campaign, no one at the White House is aggressively trying to stop the leaks or find the leakers (and this White House is notable for the way they normally go after leakers), and the information being release IS likely to get some of our people killed.
And, whereas the Obama re-election campaign featured the steelworker in a campaign conference call, the Romney campaign hasn't been publicly working with the SpecWarriors.
So no, everybody doesn't do it. It is the Obama Camp that is doing it. Just like the Obama Campaign is the first Presidential campaign to try to overshadow the other side's nominating convention. Just like Candidate Obama was the first Presidential candidate to refuse the "Matching Funds" (and the spending limits that went with them).
Care to provide some legitimate counter examples? Or can we drop this "everybody does it" BS?
I'm impressed with Romney's campaign. He's been taking it to Obama both directly with this ad and with the speech where he said Obama should take his campaign of anger, divisiveness and hate back to Chicago. Obama can't run on competence and Romney is not only not letting Obama run on like ability, he's showing voters Obama is an angry jerk. I'd bet that Romney's next tactic is to show that Obama is a whiner/weak. Incompetent, weak, asshole. Romney is playing to win.
Ah, the "everybody does it" defense. Your complaint requires one ignore two things: degree, and kind.
Even if we accept your assertion (which I don't), it sounds like whatever lies, misrepresentations, or false personal attacks you would admit the Republican Party and their supporters have engaged in are either so benign or neglible as to not needing to be addressed.
Although better than most, I continue to find our political system chock full of harmful corruption carried out by both parties. I also believe that when partisan's knowingly minimize the lies of their preferred party they are enabling the corruption.
marklevin wrote:
"Even if we accept your assertion (which I don't), it sounds like whatever lies, misrepresentations, or false personal attacks you would admit the Republican Party and their supporters have engaged in are either so benign or neglible as to not needing to be addressed."
Nope. If someone on my side engages in such a thing, that person should be censured for doing so.
But if you claim that Candidate A has a beam in his eye, and Candidate B has a mote in his eye, and therefore they're both equally bad, you are the one being dishonest.
Do you have facts that justify "rejecting my assertion"? Do you have a Romney ad as dishonest and despicable as the Steelworker ad? Yes? Name it. No?
Well, you can do whatever you wish. Just don't expect anyone serious to respect your claims.
"Everyone" speeds. That doesn't mean there's no difference between someone who drives 5 MPH above the speed limit on a highway, and someone who drives 30 MPH above the speed limit in a residential zone.
And that doesn't mean there's no difference between a speeder, and someone who engages in hit and run.
Yes, they're all criminals. No, their crimes are not all equal. If you really can't wrap your mind around that, I pity you.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा