My first thought was, "Hey, I don't like lattes! I prefer steamers!"
Does anyone think this kind of ad, which they apparently spent $100K on, is really going to change anyone's minds? I just find it amazingly funny.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
Unfortunately there are people out there ignorant and/or dumb enough to make a decision based on ads like that. Posts: 99 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd like to think that seconds after the director yelled "Cut" that they both slipped on the ice and snapped their pelvises.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't think the ad was hilarious by any means, but it may be more effective than some think. It creates a general feeling that Dean is an out-of-touch liberal extremist who wants to raise everyone's taxes substantially. The figure $1,900 was mentioned. That is scary enough to get fixed in people's minds. Dean is going to have to answer this ad, or it could cost him thousands of votes. I think that Dean really is an out-of-touch liberal extremist who wants to raise everyone's taxes substantially, so he may have a hard time answering the ad.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not a really big fan of old people, no matter what their political party.
And I think the word "Negroes" belongs somewhere in that ad. Bush would totally win Iowa, then...if he just would make less noise about letting all the illegal Mexican immigrants keep their jobs.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because Vermont is known as the land of sushi and body-piercing, right? Unless they really hate lattes in Iowa (I mean really, really, really hate them with the fire of a thousand suns), I have to agree this is pointless and stupid.
I think this is an attempt to implement Davis’s last gubernatorial campaign strategy. Club for Growth is conservative – it’s trying to influence the primaries in the hopes of getting a weaker opponent to face Bush. Hell, it worked for Davis. Who know?
posted
Sushi, maple syrup....body piercing, skiing. What the hell's the difference? All a buncha hippie bull crap if you ask me.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now I remember why I'm not watching TV until after the caucuses are over.
<---lives in Iowa.
The ad might be effective with some folks, but it's got huge potential for re-bound. It just might make some of the younger, latte-drinking, Hollywood loving, body-pieced Iowans get out and vote. Since Dean is already doing a pretty good job of mobilizing that demographic, this could actually help him.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and it also risks ticking off some of the older voters, who really don't like to be seen as backwards fuddy-duddys. Some of them even *gasp* eat sushi!
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still don't get the Hollywood-loving part. Are they saying Dean supporters like to watch movies??
Maybe it's just cause I'm a sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, NYT-reading freak show, but I just can't see anyone but the most revoltingly backwards Americans (like my dumbass grandmother) ever responding positively to this thing. It's so chock-full of laughable generic stereotypes that it's impossible to take seriously.
And yeah, they really look like they'd continue to go on about the "negro" problem and the evils of "rap music" and the sorry state of today's teenagers if you let them. Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that the add is likely to offend anyone who drinks lattes, likes sushi, drives a volvo, goes to lots of movies or reads the New York times. Which I would guess combined is most Americans.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
<-- drinks lattes, eats sushi, is not terribly fond of Hollywood, has never driven a Volvo, doesn't care for the NYT
I wasn't planning to vote for Dean before this, and I still am not. I'd like to know who sponsored this ad, so I can NOT vote for them, too. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My first reaction just now was certainty that it was a joke. If the ad were sponsored directly by a candidate, it would definitely dispose me to be against that candidate, because the ad does not address issues, and it's an absurd series of ad hominem and guilt by association attacks. body piercing?!?!
More to the point, though: No, I don't think it's an effective ad, because it won't swing anybody. The few people who are so reactionary that they actually sound like those people might not notice how stupid the ad is, but everybody in the coveted middle will, and will be turned off by it.
(It's also poorly acted. Most people don't have to move their fingers to read off of cue cards. )
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
*scratches head* Are you sure? It seems like it's trying very hard not to be taken seriously. Msybe The Onion has broken my "Joke-o-meter", too.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I were Howard Dean, I'd pay people to take out ads like that against me. Well, maybe without the tax thing.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The website makes it clear that they are on the right fringe of their own party, especially fiscally. They probably don't have a clue how off-putting and ineffective that ad is.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the hollywood loving comment was a Clinton tie in. Liberals/progressives/democrats still underestimate how much some people hate Clinton and thought he was evil incarnate. Ah, righteous hatred. It has to be better than nicotine.
Also, now the $1,900 tax raise will be linked to all those things. You see an old person, "I want my $1,900!" You see a volvo, a latte, or a pierced bodypart "I want my $1,900!" You see the NY Times or Hollywood anything, or... you get the idea. It's actually brilliant.
posted
It's silly if you don't live in NY. But I'm from the DC area, we kind of get sick of NY "we are the real nation's capital-nowhere else exists" attitude.
Edit: But the point is not that these things are bad, it is to link the tax hike with things people will encounter in their day to day lives. Volvos rule.
posted
It's seen as pretentious - rejecting your own local state/city/paper to emulate the "big city." Plus, the NYT has a wildly-liberal bent. Class warfare the other way accuses people of reading the Wall Street Journal.
[ January 09, 2004, 07:08 PM: Message edited by: Javert Hugo ]
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My sister (who lived in Provo Utah at the time) took a trial subscription one summer and every issue I saw was obsessed with Gladiator and Bill Clinton. I guess it wasn't too far off from my own views, if one saw Clinton as the creepy Emporer. I want to say it was Caligula but I only saw it once and the idea I got of Caligula from my history studies was much different.
I guess I was exposed too young to "Annie Hall" and Alfie's fear that New York was seen by the rest of the country as "left-wing communist pornographers" or words to that effect. "I even think that sometimes, and I live here."
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all, I find negative adds tastless and descusting. Is there so little running in your favoire that you have to point out someone eles "flaws?"
Second of all, we get both our local news paper and the NYT. We do this because our local paper logically enough covers mainly local issues. But the NYT has lots of national and international news. Is it so wrong to be interested in what is happening in other places besides Indiana?
And lastly, when you are attempting to insult or state your oppinon about any one it is usually to avoid brod refernse to groups such as " actors-- friggin' liberals" or "Sushi, maple syrup....body piercing, skiing... All a buncha hippie bull crap if you ask me. " Brod reaching general statments like those thend to make people less inclind to believe or lisen to anything your saying. Your particular generalizations make it obvious that your one the far fring of the right.
Posts: 150 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a side comment, the editorial pages of the wallstreet journal, conservative or not, are more than willing to repeat most smear rumors they hear, true or not. That's why I consider its opinion trash.
I don't consider the Chicago Tribune's opinions trash, and they are also conservative.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well as liberal as the NYT op-ed's are (and they are liberal), the Wall Street Journals Op-ed page is similarly conservative. They get folks from The National Review, The Weekly Standard, and I think worldnewsdaily.net and/or newsmax.com.
The actual news content of both is much better balanced.
posted
I'm a fundamentalist republican. Does this come as news to anyone? And Hatrack made me. So there.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
she said "freakshow"![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Thanks, dkw. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
