Yuck! It's the political ad season

[cheesesteak]

I hate election time because of political ads on tv. I know some people are going to say "What's an ad? I have a dvr" but I watch a lot of live tv - sports and news. Anyway, the ads all seem to follow the same template. They show the adversary and a voiceover says that he's evil, eats babies, is a bin Laden sympathizer, hates the middle class, leaves the toilet seat up, ties damsels to railroad tracks, wants you to pay more taxes and is a Dallas Cowboys fan while playing music straight out of a Alfred Hitchcock horror movie. Then they show the protagonist smiling, shaking hands, surrounded by ecstatic supporters with sunshine, rainbows and turtledoves with cheerful music in the background all the while proclaiming him the greatest reformer and corruption buster since Jesus of Nazareth. Every year it's the same thing. Just the faces change. Rant off.

[loubob57]

I can catch the more interesting ones via Youtube. Like where the candidate says she's not a witch. I guess that voter demographic isn't very large. :p

[Eddief66]

Show me one where the candidate says "I am not a crook" and I'll vote for him.

[LoadStar]

The depressing thing is, if the politicians weren't so busy telling why NOT to vote for the other people, maybe they might have more time in their ads to tell why TO vote for THEM.

I get through the political ad season and am left with the impression that everyone running is a loser and a crook, so I don't see why I should bother voting for any of them.

[scooterboy]

In the election to fill the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, Republican Scott Brown initially trailed MA Attorney General Martha Coakley in the polls.

Coakley then ran an extensive negative campaign against Brown, and I'm convinced it was the main reason that he passed her in the polls and eventually won the seat. Brown took the high road and just let her look like a spiteful idiot with her venomous accusations.

I make it a point not to vote for candidates whose ads are overly negative or misleading about their opponent. I wish more people would do the same and somehow the candidates could see how many votes they lose because of it.

[allan]

I can't think of a single ad that even mentions the candidate's name (other than the "I approve this ad" line). They use the whole ad explaining that the opponent worships Satan & eats babies.

[Steveknj]

I hate election time because of political ads on tv. I know some people are going to say "What's an ad? I have a dvr" but I watch a lot of live tv - sports and news. Anyway, the ads all seem to follow the same template. They show the adversary and a voiceover says that he's evil, eats babies, is a bin Laden sympathizer, hates the middle class, leaves the toilet seat up, ties damsels to railroad tracks, wants you to pay more taxes and is a Dallas Cowboys fan while playing music straight out of a Alfred Hitchcock horror movie. Then they show the protagonist smiling, shaking hands, surrounded by ecstatic supporters with sunshine, rainbows and turtledoves with cheerful music in the background all the while proclaiming him the greatest reformer and corruption buster since Jesus of Nazareth. Every year it's the same thing. Just the faces change. Rant off.

That alone would cause me not to vote for him/her. :)

Seriously, I agree. Just once I'd like to see someone with real ideas who can tell me what they are in a 30 second spot. Not someone who either:

1) Spends the entire 30 seconds killing his opponent

2) Spouts the party line verbatim

3) Lies/fabricates their record

4) Changes their views based on what the people want to hear (knowing full well he won't vote that way once he gets elected)

5) All of the above.

Come on, tell me what YOUR specific ideas are and get off in 30 seconds. Someone does that, I might actually vote for them based on it.

[Steveknj]

In the election to fill the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, Republican Scott Brown initially trailed MA Attorney General Martha Coakley in the polls.

Coakley then ran an extensive negative campaign against Brown, and I'm convinced it was the main reason that he passed her in the polls and eventually won the seat. Brown took the high road and just let her look like a spiteful idiot with her venomous accusations.

I make it a point not to vote for candidates whose ads are overly negative or misleading about their opponent. I wish more people would do the same and somehow the candidates could see how many votes they lose because of it.

The thing is, negative ads appear to work. Otherwise why would they be using them? The problem is, today, that this negativity follows the candidates into office, and it makes them skeptical about what the other side's agenda is.

[Steveknj]

I can't think of a single ad that even mentions the candidate's name (other than the "I approve this ad" line). They use the whole ad explaining that the opponent worships Satan & eats babies.

And it will get worse because in many cases the candidates themselves aren't even RUNNING the ads, but PACs are, and now, even corporate interests will.

I've always been a believer in level playing fields. There should be a hard limit on what any candidate can spend on a campaign. I don't care WHAT party you are with. I think it should be based on population. A certain amount per registered voter. One, it will give the "outsider" a real chance. Two, it will limit outside influence on a candidate. You'll get fairer elections. Money influence is the single most dangerous thing that has happened to our system in the past 20 years. It's gotten out of hand. And it's not ever going to change.

[jsmeeker]

About the only race that is generating a bunch of TV ads in my area is the Texas govenor race.

[LoadStar]

I make it a point not to vote for candidates whose ads are overly negative or misleading about their opponent. I wish more people would do the same and somehow the candidates could see how many votes they lose because of it.

I try to as well... but unfortunately, 1) negative ads work with others, regardless of how I feel about them, and 2) there aren't too many candidates that DON'T run endless amounts of negative ads.

[Vendikarr]

I hate election time because of political ads on tv. I know some people are going to say "What's an ad? I have a dvr" but I watch a lot of live tv - sports and news. Anyway, the ads all seem to follow the same template. They show the adversary and a voiceover says that he's evil, eats babies, is a bin Laden sympathizer, hates the middle class, leaves the toilet seat up, ties damsels to railroad tracks, wants you to pay more taxes and is a Dallas Cowboys fan while playing music straight out of a Alfred Hitchcock horror movie. Then they show the protagonist smiling, shaking hands, surrounded by ecstatic supporters with sunshine, rainbows and turtledoves with cheerful music in the background all the while proclaiming him the greatest reformer and corruption buster since Jesus of Nazareth. Every year it's the same thing. Just the faces change. Rant off.

I would love to see a commercial exactly like the one you described. It would be great.

[allan]

I would love to see a commercial exactly like the one you described. It would be great.

I'll even settle for the one showing the opponent tying damsels to railroad tracks! :D The ones I've seen aren't that interesting. :p

[Snappa77]

I hate election time because of political ads on tv. I know some people are going to say "What's an ad? I have a dvr" but I watch a lot of live tv - sports and news. Anyway, the ads all seem to follow the same template. They show the adversary and a voiceover says that he's evil, eats babies, is a bin Laden sympathizer, hates the middle class, leaves the toilet seat up, ties damsels to railroad tracks, wants you to pay more taxes and is a Dallas Cowboys fan while playing music straight out of a Alfred Hitchcock horror movie. Then they show the protagonist smiling, shaking hands, surrounded by ecstatic supporters with sunshine, rainbows and turtledoves with cheerful music in the background all the while proclaiming him the greatest reformer and corruption buster since Jesus of Nazareth. Every year it's the same thing. Just the faces change. Rant off.

:up::D:up:

This post had me cracking up. Classic. Loved it.


Gonna quote you on my FB page cuz a few friends of mine were discussing this same exact thing. Not as colorful as you did though.


In the election to fill the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, Republican Scott Brown initially trailed MA Attorney General Martha Coakley in the polls.

Coakley then ran an extensive negative campaign against Brown, and I'm convinced it was the main reason that he passed her in the polls and eventually won the seat. Brown took the high road and just let her look like a spiteful idiot with her venomous accusations.


This is so true. Funny thing about Scott Brown is that he isn't far right as they tried to make him out to be. Some national ppl are mad about that but for us here in Mass it fits and works fine. We are one of the bluest states but we can/have/will elect a Repub for office in a heartbeat. Next Governors race might prove that once again.

[vman41]

Every time I heard O'Donnell say she's not a witch, I think "She turned me into a Newt!".

[YCantAngieRead]

I really want to do what I did a year or so ago...I wrote down the names of every candidate that I saw had a negative ad, then refused to vote for any of them.

I may still do it. I'm tired of the demonization of anyone who doesn't agree with the opposing party.

[Steveknj]

:up::D:up:

This post had me cracking up. Classic. Loved it.


Gonna quote you on my FB page cuz a few friends of mine were discussing this same exact thing. Not as colorful as you did though.




This is so true. Funny thing about Scott Brown is that he isn't far right as they tried to make him out to be. Some national ppl are mad about that but for us here in Mass it fits and works fine. We are one of the bluest states but we can/have/will elect a Repub for office in a heartbeat. Next Governors race might prove that once again.

Like Dems in red states that get elected can't be TOO liberal, a Repub can't be TOO conservative or they would never get elected in a blue state. Of course (and this gets back to the whole lying, smearing thing) they will try and paint him that way.

[allan]

Every time I heard O'Donnell say she's not a witch, I think "She turned me into a Newt!".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich ?

:D

[nickels]

Attack ads might work, but they should be banned on TV regardless of their impact. These ads should focus on why to vote for you instead of why not to vote for your opponent. Even more amazing is how they can basically lie in these ads without any repercussions. Before an ad airs, the "facts" should go through a verification process.

[Steveknj]

Attack ads might work, but they should be banned on TV regardless of their impact. These ads should focus on why to vote for you instead of why not to vote for your opponent. Even more amazing is how they can basically lie in these ads without any repercussions. Before an ad airs, the "facts" should go through a verification process.

As long as money is this readily available, candidates will do "whatever it takes" to get elected.

[bleen]

In addition to the usual annoyances of these ads, the catchphrase "and I approve this message!" is getting way out of hand. IIRC, it originated at the end of a negative ad, where the sunshiny candidate gave his confirmation to the damsel-tying allegations against their opponent.

Now even the positive ads have the candidate "approving the message" - well duh, of course you approve; it shouldn't even be an issue that you approve, and I think you look worse having to validate the glowing things just said about you.

:rolleyes:

[Ruth]

I am totally the opposite! I am fascinated by politics. The political ads are the only ones I will actually rewind to watch.

[wisny]

In addition to the usual annoyances of these ads, the catchphrase "and I approve this message!" is getting way out of hand. IIRC, it originated at the end of a negative ad, where the sunshiny candidate gave his confirmation to the damsel-tying allegations against their opponent.

Now even the positive ads have the candidate "approving the message" - well duh, of course you approve; it shouldn't even be an issue that you approve, and I think you look worse having to validate the glowing things just said about you.

:rolleyes:


I think they have to include that tag in their ads. Maybe it was part of McCain-Feingold? I can't remember ...

[YCantAngieRead]

I think they have to include that tag in their ads. Maybe it was part of McCain-Feingold? I can't remember ...

You're right on the first part, I'm not sure about the second. They're required to add that "disclaimer" to all ads.

[LoadStar]

In addition to the usual annoyances of these ads, the catchphrase "and I approve this message!" is getting way out of hand. IIRC, it originated at the end of a negative ad, where the sunshiny candidate gave his confirmation to the damsel-tying allegations against their opponent.

Now even the positive ads have the candidate "approving the message" - well duh, of course you approve; it shouldn't even be an issue that you approve, and I think you look worse having to validate the glowing things just said about you.

:rolleyes:

The reason this is done is to distinguish campaign-funded advertisements from those placed by PACs or by the political parties. By law, all political ads have to indicate who paid for the ads.

[rahnbo]

The worst part of it all is on election night when all the local channels will interrupt every show to tell you who is the projected winner in the dog catcher election.

[bleen]

Huh well obviously I didn't know that was a requirement. Just one more reason to look forward to the next one :eek:

[cheesesteak]

Political Ads - Mean And Getting Meaner (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20101025/pl_yblog_exclusive/political-ads-mean-and-getting-meaner-before-nov-2;_ylt=Aq3W7VnIJ94CuTrE0wcRtEus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTR2Y2RkdGQ3BGF zc2V0A3libG9nX2V4Y2x1c2l2ZS8yMDEwMTAyNS9wb2xpdGljYWwtYWRzLW1 lYW4tYW5kLWdldHRpbmctbWVhbmVyLWJlZm9yZS1ub3YtMgRjY29kZQNtb3N 0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzEEcG9zAzIEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl90b3B fc3RvcnkEc2xrA3BvbGl0aWNhbGFkcw--)

Man, it's tough watching live sports and the early morning news these days.

[sieglinde]

Yucck. California is the worst. I see the same ads over and over again. I am blessed also with seeing ads for politicians I have never heard of since my TV comes from Los Angeles and I live a county away.

[Crow159]

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/10/15/best-political-attac.html

Saw this ad on The Soup. Best political ad of all time.

[DeDondeEs]

I actually find the political ads more entertaining than the usual personal injury attorney ads we're subjected to.

[allan]

I actually find the political ads more entertaining than the usual personal injury attorney ads we're subjected to.

True. They've pushed the Viagra/Cialis ads off for awhile.

[aadam101]

I don't see any of the TV ads but I hear lots on the radio. I noticed this election season not a single candidate has a positive thing to say about themselves. Every ad is attacking their opponent. I realize it's always like this to some degree, it just seems more hostile this time.

[jsmeeker]

I love it how they will make something like a state legislature race all about Obama.

[cheesesteak]

I get a kick out of Candidate A calling Candidate B a "career politician" like it's a four letter word when Candidate A is trying to become a career politician by defeating Candidate B.

[jsmeeker]

I get a kick out of Candidate A calling Candidate B a "career politician" like it's a four letter word when Candidate A is trying to become a career politician by defeating Candidate B.

It's also funny when a guy like Jerry Brown calls himself an "outsider"

[allan]

I don't see any of the TV ads but I hear lots on the radio. I noticed this election season not a single candidate has a positive thing to say about themselves. Every ad is attacking their opponent. I realize it's always like this to some degree, it just seems more hostile this time.

I don't recall an ad even mentioning the candidate's name except for the "I approve this" line. I only hear their name on their opponent's ads.

[sieglinde]

I saw a few positive ones nearer the beginning of the campaign. November 2nd, a week a way. :)

[doom1701]

I love it how they will make something like a state legislature race all about Obama.

Our state legislature ads are focusing on Pelosi. Yeah, I really care that a candidate for a state house seat is in the same party as some creepy woman from California. :rolleyes:

I voted this year for people that have stayed positive. Rick Snyder has stayed on point and positive through his entire campaign; he also has a huge lead right now. The other two non-libertarians I voted for (one Republican, one Democrat) have led fairly positive campaigns as well.

And, ironically, the ad at the top of the page on the thread is for Rick Snyder. :)

[jsmeeker]

Our state legislature ads are focusing on Pelosi. Yeah, I really care that a candidate for a state house seat is in the same party as some creepy woman from California. :rolleyes:




Yeah.. Pelosi get's mentioned too. "<so and so>. Another Obama/Pelosi liberal we don't need!"

[WhiskeyTango]

I literally can not watch the local networks live. Every commercial break is nothing but the same political ads over and over. Most of them don't even apply to me since I live in New Jersey and most of the ads are for Pennsylvania congress and governor.

[allan]

Yeah.. Pelosi get's mentioned too. "<so and so>. Another Obama/Pelosi liberal we don't need!"

The D candidate here is "another vote for Obama/Pelosi/Reid". With a (I assume) photoshopped pic of the four of them together.

[doom1701]

Yeah.. Pelosi get's mentioned too. "<so and so>. Another Obama/Pelosi liberal we don't need!"

I'm still trying to figure out how our County Commissioner, who is running for a state house seat and has been one of the more conservative people I've known, is an "Obama/Pelosi liberal". I guess it's no different than all of the dog catcher level stuff from the primary election being so focused on "I'm pro-life!"

It does bug me that the party will act as a negative advertiser for you. I think Snyder here in MI has kept that pretty under control, but in this state house race, the Democrat has run a very positive campaign, but his party has been sending out giant mailers saying that his opponent eats babies.

[cheesesteak]

It's a wonder we have a civilization left at all considering every incumbent has seemingly destroyed America.

[3D]

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/10/15/best-political-attac.html

Saw this ad on The Soup. Best political ad of all time.

I saw this before your post, but I'll chime in to give you props anyways as I'm sure it's frustrating posting a gem like this and getting no feedback whatsoever. You are 100% correct, this is the best political ad of all time. Nicely done.

[That Don Guy]

I live in the San Francisco area, and I can't remember seeing a single "Pelosi for Congress" ad airing. (I guess every party figures she's a lock and wants to spend the money in other campaigns.)

Another race that has had zero advertising: Proposition 420 - er, Proposition 19. (Even if it does pass, who would pay the tax, knowing that the information would then be available to the DEA and/or the FBI so they could arrest the growers under Federal law?)

-- Don

[sieglinde]

I got a mailer from a Pro-Choice group listing some candidates for state office such as Comptroller etc. None of their offices have anything to do with abortion issues. Nuthin'.

I have been going to YouTube and watching some great Jerry Brown ads. Love him or hate him these are great.

[JFriday]

I hate the phone calls, 5 of them last night.

[That Don Guy]

I got a mailer from a Pro-Choice group listing some candidates for state office such as Comptroller etc. None of their offices have anything to do with abortion issues. Nuthin'.
Did the names have asterisks next to them? In California, at least, there is a law that says that if somebody paid for the endorsement, there has to be an asterisk next to their name on the mailer.

-- Don

[jsmeeker]

The D candidate here is "another vote for Obama/Pelosi/Reid". With a (I assume) photoshopped pic of the four of them together.

You live in Nevada?

[EscapeGoat]

I live in the San Francisco area, and I can't remember seeing a single "Pelosi for Congress" ad airing. (I guess every party figures she's a lock and wants to spend the money in other campaigns.)

Another race that has had zero advertising: Proposition 420 - er, Proposition 19. (Even if it does pass, who would pay the tax, knowing that the information would then be available to the DEA and/or the FBI so they could arrest the growers under Federal law?)

-- Don

How would the DEA or FBI get information about someone buying marijuana? People will be able to walk into a store, pay for their purchase, and walk out. If they look young they might get carded to make sure their old enough to buy.

[cheesesteak]

I have to admit that the ad mocking ex-Philadelphia Eagle Jon Runyan and his donkey farm is pretty funny.

[Zephyr]

One of our US Rep contenders dropped off barf bags marked "Are you sick of the same old, same old?"

[That Don Guy]

I love it how they will make something like a state legislature race all about Obama.In a way, most state legislature (and governor) races are about Obama - specifically, his ability to get "his agenda" through Congress, since state legislatures elected in 2010 will be in charge of drawing the lines of Congressional districts in most states.

How would the DEA or FBI get information about someone buying marijuana? People will be able to walk into a store, pay for their purchase, and walk out.It's not about the person buying it, but the store selling it; only "licensed premises" will be allowed to sell marijuana under Proposition 19, so somebody in Sacramento has a record of the places legally allowed to sell marijuana, which means the FBI knows where they can get the addresses for the warrants.

-- Don