— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 28, 2020
Bombastic music, clearly intended to be very upbeat and optimistic. Did that work on you or did you find it annoying? The voiceover actor seemed awfully hammy. I'm just showing this to you. I'm pretty sure if you're already a Trumpster, you'll find it rousing and encouraging, but you're fooling yourself if you think it will do anything but have the opposite effect on those who don't like Trump.
Earlier this morning, before I saw this ad, I was thinking about how some speech works against the proposition asserted. I was listening to "Morning Joe," and I can't remember exactly what he was saying, but it put the opposite idea in my head. It got me thinking about why I voted against Jimmy Carter in 1976. My opinion flipped on the last day after something Carter said.
This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.
पोस्ट्स
८३ टिप्पण्या:
Women are really bad at interpreting what men say.
Women: how does it fit with feelings.
Men: how does it fit with structure.
The election is a GOTV effort. I could do with less bombast but Trump will try to fire up the troops. Who's out there who can still be persuaded one way or another?
I looked up what Carter said. "He said he'd go back to his peanut farm. This answer -- does it seem innocuous to you? -- gnawed at me overnight . . . I'd decided he was a small man."
I think your intuition about Carter was right, but are you saying you believed him?
The one consistently expressed theme about our current politics that I agree with is that it is hyper-polarized, at the national level and about the candidates for the only national office. I think it was Yancey Ward that stated recently that about 47% of the electorate will vote for Biden (or whoever the Democrats put up) and 47% will vote for Trump. The other 6% are in play and whichever candidate wins the most of them will be POTUS come January 2021.
Ads don't have to shore up the base or try to win over the other guy's supporters, they need to appeal to and win the support of the 6%-ers. I'm in no position to judge the effectiveness of this ad, because I'm a Trump fan, and I don't know any 6%-ers to ask.
The ads you run now aren’t the ones you run down the stretch.
These should all be learning opportunities, testing hypotheses to dial in your messaging.
If you don’t run some things you’re not sure will work, you’re not searching outside your comfort zone.
That "In a world where..." voice is pretty stock. It doesn't really affect me, but it doesn't draw me in. I like the concept--"Trump gets it done" but it would be more effective if so many things on the list weren't things that everyone wants and would have happened no matter who was president.
So, over all, even though it's only 30 seconds, I wouldn't have made it to the end except for the fact that I wanted to comment on it here. I rate it a "meh"
The more combative Trump is now, the less he has to be later this year.
He can afford to be more magnanimous when the situation presents itself without his base wondering whether he’s lost his fast ball.
In 2016 people were voting either against Hillary or against Trump.
In 2020 we will be voting either for Trump or against him. I don't see anyone going to the polls excited to vote for Biden. Biden is essentially a place holder.
Meh. I think you're being unfair. This is typical campaigning. I find nothing special or unique about the ad. I don't think it will move the needle much for anyone, in any direction. But most ads don't.
Yeah. Trump's ad people should have used Bob Dylan tunes.
The Artist of the Deal never gives up as his initial move. And the wartime President Trump has fight two fronts at once : China and the Soros Cabal. Which means he is attacking in two directions at once. The sweet talk time is over.
we know you are voting against trump again. the tell is that you watch morning joe everyday.
"This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say."
Moral equivalency cop-out!
But incorrect, factually. The arguments for and against each candidate is their record of public policy. The policies that effect millions of people. Trump's policies have been excellent, in my opinion. Particularly up to the coronavirus pandemic. In contrast, Joe Biden's policy proposals are Leftwing nonsense. His primary policy during the Obama administration was Obamacare, which was crap. His other policy seemed to extort money from Ukraine and coddle China, to financially benefit his grifter Son.
Much of this has been eclipsed by the pandemic. I would say Trump's handling of the pandemic, has not been outstanding, but merely "good". He bought the lockdown argument, mostly out of political expediency, but bought it nonetheless, so he has to own it. He has been better at moving towards a reopening.
"I think your intuition about Carter was right, but are you saying you believed him?"
I don't know why he'd say it if it weren't true — that if he lost the Presidency, his second choice of what to do with himself was to go back to his peanut farm. That didn't sound as though he had much of an idea that he had something to offer the world. Just go back where he started, as a farmer. Whether it was exactly true or not wasn't what mattered. I suspect he was bullshitting — trying to seem like Washington/Cincinnatus — but the choice of bullshit still says a lot about you. Maybe he couldn't think of anything better, that it wouldn't sound better to say, Well, maybe I'll run for the next Senate seat that opens in Georgia and try for the presidency again in a few years. What could he say. The peanut farm was right there, so, go with peanuts.
How about a "Gimme Shelter" soundtrack with a burning police station in the background?
What do you think of Truman? He went back to Kansas, had one SS agent, went for walks, and hung out with old Prendergast machine cronies.
"I suspect he was bullshitting — trying to seem like Washington/Cincinnatus — but the choice of bullshit still says a lot about you"
True, and true.
"That "In a world where..." voice is pretty stock."
No. It's not that voice. It's precisely because it's not that voice that I noticed it and found it weird.
It was more like the voice from a cheesy late-night TV ad.
You're thinking of what's called the "voice of God" in documentaries. It didn't feel like that to me at all. It was less sonorous, less serioso, more nudging you in the ribs, asking you hey, don't you want to be excited?
One more reason I quit listening to politicians nearly a decade ago. I judge them by their actions. As for Trump's war with Twitter, he should have moved to a new platform. I know why he didn't.
It was more like the voice from a cheesy late-night TV ad.
Or every political ad I hear. Sounds like a Mark Kelly ad, which omits his party, of course.
stevew said... The other 6% are in play and whichever candidate wins the most of them will be POTUS come January 2021.
There are some significant implications to this for our political atmosphere. For instance, all the caterwauling on the left about Trump's base being Confederate Nazi gay haters, that Confederate Nazi gay haters put him tin the White House ignores the plain and obvious fact that the people who put Trump in the White House also put Barack Obama there.
Of course, I'm fine with the left saying that swing voters are Klansmen because that will just encourage them to vote for Trump again.
Ann Althouse said...
"That "In a world where..." voice is pretty stock."
No. It's not that voice.
That's your opinion. My opinion is that it is. It's the first thing that popped into my head as the narrator started up. So, for me, I am right.
Agree with you, Althouse. D Day is when, Joe?
It wasn't what Carter said that cost him the Professor's vote, it was the way he said it.
He should've paused, stared into the distance then started in on a rendition of Yellow Brick Road.
As a politcal ad, I found the music and voiceover pretty cookie cutter.
In tone, meant to 'cut through' rather than sooth.
"This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say."
As someone in the pro-freedom blogosphere wrote back in Trump's first 100 days, the most important thing about Trump is not what he says but what he does. And as someone in the pro-freedom camp, I have been relatively pleased. I don't like tariffs, but on the whole he has remained relatively lower on the Statist Scale (aka the Coercion Meter) than all the State-shtuppers in the Democratic Party, staying at about 4-5 whereas the Democratic zoo keeps inching themselves from 6 or 7 to 8 or 9 (10 being total tyranny a la Hitler, Mao, Stalin, et al). I give a lot of weight to Second Amendment issues, and I thought Trump would waffle or even fold after the Parkland shootings, but he has remained good there.
And of course Trump continues to make crazy the Worst and Stupidest People on Earth: the "liberal" Hive. (Google "The Hive," Sobran.)
Advertising doen't deliver a message, or sway opinion, change minds. Advertising makes you pause, plant a seed. Open a pathway. For me advertising draws me to something I was already interested in. Advertising also validates my present decision. I linger over that ad for the refrigerator I bought 10 months ago. The ad for models I passed over, dont tweek me.
I'm a poor market though. Political ads of any stripe bores me. I haven't opened this video, I seldom watch videos, too time consuming.
The exception is my daughters self wrote, filmed and starred in, Vacation Bible School pitch she emailed me. That work is an exception to the above.
This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.
In political advertising it's been that way for a while. Look at all these "we care" ads companies put out. They are relying on ways of older ways of appealing to people that the better TV shows have learned to avoid, so they feel phony. It's similar with political advertising. It can have a hollow grandiosity, and people know it's not on the level.
Ford and Carter are relevant today. They were "decent" in comparison to Nixon and Johnson (and Kennedy). They were modest men whose modesty was understood as honesty. Biden and his supporters are trying to make a similar case today. Biden is supposed to be "decent" in contrast to Trump, and his mediocrity (for he's not really a modest man) is to be understood as honesty.
Ford versus Carter was a relatively non-ideological election, and something like that looks different and refreshing in our hyperpartisan era.
Didn’t Bloomberg have a “Mike will get it done” slogan, and hasn’t Biden had a “Joe knows tho get it done”ad? How have those worked out?
So is there just one political ad company ou there? Stop trying to make “get it done” happen.
It does evoke the emotions of America First. Doesn't work for me but I'll let others decide how influential it is...
This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.
Couldn't agree more. If anything is going to push me back to wasting my vote on the Libertarian candidate (whoever it turns out to be) listening to these two will do it. I can't vote for a Dem ever again in my life. That party is gone to me. Has been for years and it just keeps showing up with worse people. Biden...he's not even the worst of it.
And Trump. Love his ability to take action and love the actions he's taken. And I know he could have done even more had he had a willing congress to work with instead of having to fight corrupt accusations. That said, his mouth and his twitter may have reached peak annoyance to me.
I'm tired of bad politicians and stupid Journalism! (the exclamation point is not on the sentence, but on the word Journalism! I always do that because that's the impression I get from them. That they are Special! In fact, they are. Just not in the way they think.)
And the ad? Horrible ad. But then, 90% of political ads these days run one of three styles. This is one. Another is the softer, 'Morning in America' approach. The last is the 'other guy is actually evil' approach. This Trump ad will appeal to some of his voters, but not sway a single person outside of that small circle.
"That didn't sound as though he had much of an idea that he had something to offer the world."
I don't want someone who "has something to offer the world." Politicians are full enough of themselves as it is.
Such dramatic music!
...you're fooling yourself if you think it will do anything but have the opposite effect on those who don't like Trump."
You're that familiar with the emotional responses of Trump-haters that you presume to tell us what that reaction would be?
And you know this hiw, exactly?
“This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.”
I disagree. The best arguments for or against both candidates are the things they DO.
Words can be manipulated.
Actions speak louder than words.
1974: Our long national nightmare is over.
2020 (2021?): Our long national snow day is over.
This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.
It begins with falsely equating the two candidates. Next we'll be told that since there really is no difference between them, and she might just as well vote for Biden. Then some stupid accusation will emerge about Trump, obviously fake, and we will be told that this makes Trump unelectable, and she has to vote for Biden.
yeah - Team Trump can do better and they have done better. Agree the voice and emphasis is not quite right. It's too marvel comics.
The ad was just ok as far as execution is concerned, but the message is interesting. I see it as a contrast ad: With Trump, it isn't about about fancy words and lofty sentiments, or acting "presidential"; it's about action. You like what he does, right? Then vote for him. Right now, Biden isn't a strong candidate in terms of either rhetorical presentation or in terms of having a track record of accomplishment, so Trump can go head to head against him either way. But in drawing a contrast he's choosing to emphasize substance over form.
AA said: "...you're fooling yourself if you think it will do anything but have the opposite effect on those who don't like Trump."
It's not aimed at those people, nor should it be. Is there anyone who doesn't know for whom they are going to vote? Ask yourselves ... Do you know anyone who doesn't know?
This Presidential election will be decided by voter turnout. That, and Democrat vote fraud.
That said, his mouth and his twitter may have reached peak annoyance to me.
That's why I avoid Twitter and always have. It is a cesspool. I usually can't watch him speak but I like what he does. Nothing else counts.
I hate every moment of that Trump video. I can't stand to watch it for even a minute.
In contrast I have usually kind of liked the Obama stuff, I mean the surface appearance of it, not the substance.
Despite that there isn't the slightest doubt about whom I'm voting for and it won't be for whomever the Democratic Party selects.
In every election I have ever voted in, it has been a case of voting for the lessor evil. I certainly felt that way the last election. I was definitely voting against the Democratic Party -- and the Obama administration -- and Hillary Clinton.
But this time in addition to voting against the malignant left, I will be voting for Donald Trump, for despite his many manifest flaws, he is doing well on the big issues. In fact he is doing almost surreally well in an impossible situation.
That isn't to say that I cannot imagine a better candidate. Of course I can. The trouble is it would probably be a case of imagining something that doesn't exist.
A gentle reminder of how our gracious hostess reacted to Slow Joe Biden's entry into the race, with a "blatant lie" to fan the the inflammatory racial flames about the Charlottesville incident:
How dare Biden rest his campaign on a blatant lie — a lie that has been used to stir up fear and racial discord?! The hypocrisy of offering to bring us together and embrace lofty values when he is either repulsively ignorant or just plain lying!
I could not finish watching that video. I tried, but I couldn't force myself. It's utterly toxic bilge.
If Biden does not come forward and retract this video and apologize and commit himself to making amends, I consider him disqualified. He does not have the character or brain power to be President.
Posted by Ann Althouse at 10:33 AM 4.25.19
Stick to your initial instincts, Althouse. They were largely correct in April of 2019, they are largely correct now.
If anything is going to push me back to wasting my vote on the Libertarian candidate (whoever it turns out to be)
Jo Jorgensen. Dems were freaking out on Twitter because they suddenly saw "I'm with her" trending right after she was nominated at the (virtual) convention and they didn't know what it was about.
@Althouse, you are everything despicable about the female voter. You fret over Trump’s fighting but don’t seem to be all that bothered by your beloved Democrats starting those fights. And don’t try to tell us that you do push back against your Democrats; you really don’t. I think Gahrie is right about you, more’s the pity.
I can’t imagine any political ad swaying a voter who is a Trump hater. And let’s be clear...the lefties hate the RacistTangerine. I am immune to political ads. I only either enjoy them, or I ignore them. And I only enjoy them if they make the other candidate look bad.
I’m pretty simpleminded that way. There! It’s been said. And not for the first time.
- Krumhorn.
"In 2020 we will be voting either for Trump or against him. I don't see anyone going to the polls excited to vote for Biden. Biden is essentially a place holder."
So far, around Madison, WI, I've seen more Trump signs than Biden signs. Of course Bernie or Warren signs still outnumber Trump or Biden signs by more than 100:1. Cross the Dane County line though and it's a different story. Far more Trump signs than anything else (except signs advertising hybrid corn seed.)
I saw a good analogy: “Trump is like chemotherapy, unpleasant, but a probable cure for what ails America.”
Unfortunately, he apparently still offends many women. Meanwhile, Clinton’s rape and adultery, Biden’s offensive touching of women and little girls, his grifting, his career full of lying, plagiarism and stupidity, and now his likely mental deficiency, are and have been of no import to them.
All the Democrat female candidates for the vice presidency are afflicted with this illogic - maybe all female Democrats.
Lots of Bernie Tee shirts among white rioters last night on Lileks' photos.
Interesting dynamics. Glad I'm a thousand miles from Milwaukee this summer.
“Bombastic music?” Seriously?
It wouldn’t do to say “stirring music.” It might imply that there is something stirring about a President who gets the job done despite Orangemanbad.
A different narrator and no music, and this ad would have hit it out of the park.
And, yes- that voice over does evoke memories of Don LaFontaine.
From the post clip:
Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), who is African American and Indian, as a leading contender.
Seems like fake news. Kamala Harris is black. No question there. Black from both her mother's side and her father's.
She is not "African-American" in any normal usage of the word.
Of course, neither is Shaun King or rachel Dolezal. But if Bruce Jenner can be a "woman", then I guess all 3 of them can be "African-American"
Don't forget to lie to a pollster today. Or any other day you are asked who you like. None of their business.
John Henry
It wasn't me that wrote the 47+ 47 + 6, but I more or less agree with it. I would just make the 47s 44s, and made the middle swing 12%. I would also point out that the 44s consist of people who vote no matter what, and people who vote only sometimes.
More than just an appeal to stevew's "undecided 6%", political ads are intended to motivate your own supporters to vote. Winning the turnout war is probably the main reason for so much political spending. Losing that war killed Hillary in 2016.
For this ad, I wonder about that line, "He's not always polite". It's an acknowledgement, an approach used in communication to open someone up to your point of view. Is it directed at the 6% or at a suspected body of "squishy" Trump voters who may be weary of wordsmanship.
What of the things Trump has done?
“... why I voted against Jimmy Carter in 1976. My opinion flipped on the last day after something Carter said.”
Never mind the intolerable interest rates, the sagging economy, the Iran fiasco, cancelling the Olympics or the fact that prior to Obama Carter was heading the list for worst President ever. The day before the election “Carter said [something].”
Forget the intelligence, the education, “He said something. I am woman here me roar! ”
Saints preserve us! Hardin is right!
And pair this pinned ad with the tweet about looters. The Democrats are being maneuvered into supporting looting, and they don't seem to realize it just yet.
If you were foooled by Carter's words, you deserved every moment of his miserable four years in office.
This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say.
In 2020, very much so. But, honestly, it was ever so.
You, with your reading of Caro's extended biography of Pres. Johnson, know very well what an assemblage of pricks the politicians of yore were. It's just a lot harder to hide now.
“This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say."
The Democrat/leftmediaswine world runs on bullshit. It’s all about what is said. E.g., the Russia hoax, impeachment by hearsay, “you can keep you doctor,” “racist, sexist, white supremacist,” etc.
For non-Democrats what is done still has value.
I followed the link back to the Ford-Carter post. Wow. A few of the same names, but most of those commenters seem to have moved on.
With the understanding that my vote (and yours) is merely the shadow of a shard of a once-meaningful act of civic participation, I'll vote against the Ds again.
Narr
The ad is mediocre, and wasted on me
My rule would be
Never show Trump in a Trump ad.
Show footage of the results of Trump.
Talk results.
Show people working, military coming home, young couple/new home, babies, and
Medical people dealing with Covid.
Simple music. Opposite of bombast.
Bonus: cast for a female VO.
The outstanding quality of the ad is is its truthfulness. Trump is not Mr. Nice Guy and he does get things done. This will never change the mind of anyone who is anti-Trump, but then realistically, nothing will. It may however influence the fence-sitter, the apolitical voter. That's who Trump needs to target, and the ad seems effective in that regard.
He has done better ads than this, but I am sure it appeals to some people.
Donald J. Trump: What you see is what you get.
Thanks Mary Beth (the commenter). I'll check her out. Jo Jorgensen
But there is a part of me that would love to see the exploding heads at CNN and NYTimes when Trump wins in Nov. It'll be a scene out of a Hieronymus Bosch painting.
"This year, it seems the best arguments against both candidates are the things they themselves say."
At some point it pays to focus on what they've done, as past actions are the best predictor of what they're likely to do if given the office and the power. And the corollary is that it's always best to discount what politicians say.
Re the gets things done as so many have mentioned. Yes, that is PDJT to a T. Should always be emphasised.
But I saw a cute meme last night somewhere.
Top half of the poster was PDJT, lower half Biden.
Gist was that Candidate Trump talked about women letting celebrities grab them by the pussy.
Biden actually gets it done. Grabbing.
John Henry
I will add one additional point that seems to have been missed by everyone else: the ad is targeting the abnormally large share of the vote that Gary Johnson and Egg McMuffin combined to get in 2016, almost all of which are normally Republican votes. One of the complaints by the NeverTrump Republicans was Trump's lack of civility and comportment- the ad takes that complaint on directly- it encourages such voters to finally come back home and vote for the top of the ticket, and that could easily add 3% margin to Trump's vote totals from 2016.
Blogger Michael K said..Lots of Bernie Tee shirts among white rioters last night on Lileks' photos. Interesting dynamics. Glad I'm a thousand miles from Milwaukee this summer.
You are not a kidding. I'm still down in the Florida Panhandle getting in lots of bike rides and vitamin D absorption and not in St. Paul because of the governor's release of the covid lockdown via a slow-walk and now the mo-fo & Bernie Bro & Antifa uprising. A lot of the inner city damage may not be rebuilt and maybe some of the large companies headquartered here may decide this lawlessness isn't acceptable and relocate over time. Interesting times.
It reminds me of Colbert when he used to play Stephen Colbert on TV, literally draped in the Stars and Stripes while the eagle soared. It won’t persuade anyone, but it’s good for a laugh, with Trump or at him.
Which is why you are so easily and often lead astray. I mean, how relevant was it that Obama told us we could keep our doctor, and premiums would drop $2500. Was that any help in knowing that he would actually accomplished just the opposite.
What is useful is what a candidate's record is. Trump's was mixed, but mostly successful before he was elected, and as President he had a very successful first term, despite unprecedented challenges primarily from the Democrats and the media.
Obama had no record of success managing anything. He had blown every public penny put under his care, he had no other real record, and we never even saw his performance in college, the only thing he really did before running.
Hilary had a long record of failure and corruption, and we would never have known of her had she not married Bill.
Biden is decades of failure, corruption, and being wrong on most issues during his public life.
They all said things constantly that sounded good, but so does every used car salesman, but even the salesman has a record, and that's what tells you the truth.
Well AA was wrong about her interpretation of what Carter meant. He'd go back to his farm but he wouldn't just stay there. A one term governor who could go on What's My Line without the panel covering their eyes had the biggest vision of our recent ex presidents.
The voiceover is definitely hammy, but they all sound hammy. The tone might not persuade anyone, but the message 'He might sound rough but he gets work done' might have appeal.
It's not original or brilliant, but if you "get it done" you can say so and it will be effective. The problem with Bloomberg was that people had no idea whether he could get things done or whether his success was just due to following Giuliani's example. If you don't believe that Trump can get anything done, the ad won't convince you, but you aren't the audience: the point is more to convince Trump supporters and people who feel they benefited from in the Trump years to vote for him. If they don't think Trump is getting it done anymore they just might decide to give Mr. Nice Guy (who isn't really that nice) a try, and the president will be in trouble.
About Carter and the farm: The Cincinnatus thing is overdone. People want a candidate to talk about being a fighter and not giving up and always trying to be there for the people, even if the only reason they stick around is to get power and a steady salary. I wouldn't have held that against Carter, though. If I could have voted, it might have been for Eugene McCarthy, who was even more diffident and withdrawn than Jimmy. McCarthy wouldn't have gone back home if he lost, but he might not have bothered to show up for inauguration if by some miracle he managed to win.
"The Voice". I immediately flashed on what has been titled "Best Short Film Ever":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXfltmzRG-g
Might be the same guy.
my vote wont' turn on a dime.
I vote anti-leftwing corruption every time.
If Biden does not come forward and retract this video and apologize and commit himself to making amends, I consider him disqualified. He does not have the character or brain power to be President.
Posted by Ann Althouse at 10:33 AM 4.25.19
Stick to your initial instincts, Althouse. They were largely correct in April of 2019, they are largely correct now.
Like she says, she doesn't believe the things she professes to believe. If there was any sincerity to that at all, which I don't think there was, she will manage to "reason" herself, as she takes off her clothes once again, that THIS time, he surely won't get it in her hair!
"He's not always polite". It's an acknowledgement, an approach used in communication to open someone up to your point of view. Is it directed at the 6% or at a suspected body of "squishy" Trump voters who may be weary of wordsmanship.
Counter argument is right in the thread:
his mouth and his twitter may have reached peak annoyance to me.
so we have our target audience! But the very next paragraph: And the ad? Horrible ad.
Unless you mean someone else's wordsmanship.
I thought it rather banal. I see it as countering the media narrative, not attempting to garner votes. (That may be the first time I've ever used the word "garner".)
My Q for ad VO experts : which is more fake : news >>> prime time VO (Cronkite, Koppel) as compared to ads late-late-night VO (Popeil, Shamwow)
on earlier discussion about mail-in balloting and handing off to friend for delivery there was example proposed of putting weights on each side of scales.
so how much weight for VO's answers gestures etc. ?
That ad reminded me of Starship Troopers.
The ad was standard political advertising fare, but in this case points to factual accomplishments plus an acknowledgement of his stylistic shortcoming. All of which presents as authentic.
Complaining about the music or voice is nitpicking, missing the forest for the trees.
The adv captured my feelings about Trump.
It’s very Jacksonian.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा