Or bother to see the results of the last election? Most of those Democrats who distanced themselves from Obama didn’t win.
If there was a Democrat who didn’t and won in a competitive race, that might mean something. Liberals and conservatives alike tend to point out in losing elections that it was mainly the moderates who lost. Well yeah, the moderates are in the most competitive districts. The losing party will tend to have fewer moderates than the losing party. As of today, the Democrats have almost none left. That is NOT actually an endorsement of liberalism. A real moderate like Jon Manchin probably would have won in all of those southern races.
R or D, everyone with a mortgage would like it somehow lowered. There was some blabber a few years ago that Obama could (would? wanted to?) do just that. So an ad implying Obama could lower your mortgage just seems believable. I’ve never clicked on the ad but I’ll bet it’s something like, “IF you do this and IF you qualify for that and If your current mortgage is such and such,and IF you sign up with us, we’ll charge you and look for you another mortgage.”
I should add that I don’t actually think Obama actually said, “Hey, I want to lower mortgages” just that he made noise about helping bailout the homeowner too. So an ad like this would seem believable to even Republicans, who tho they complain about freebies and handouts, are first in line for scooters and social security.
Note that the ads may be particularly trailing you because your browsing history suggests Democratic inclinations.
Well, the increase in Obama’s popularity sure looks like bad news for the Romney campaign, that’s certain. As for what else it means I don’t know, but I do know that nobody needs to deal with it.
Mostly we heard about how it did that, not how it’s going to do that. Obama isn’t on the ballot next time, and congresscritters don’t need to campaign about how they will or will not support his policies going forward.
I’ve never seen one. Can you tell us how often they run and where?
Or, maybe they just have these commercials form years ago when Obama was more popular and they don’t want to spend money on new ads.
At any rate, without more info about these ads, I’d say it’s hard to say anything one way or the other.
It’s possible for someone to be cool but unpopular at the same time. Take Justin Bieber, for instance.
Huh, so I’m really the only person who gets these ads? They show up pretty much everywhere that has ads.
And let the record show that Republicans in this thread are arguing that politicians know better than the free market.
You probably don’t because there were no programs started under Bush to help the average homeowner. And the people who were helped by Bush initiatives don’t need to be told about them, they’re the ones whose lobbyists crafted the stuff in the first place.
With caveats: popularity can vary widely. This site claims that G.W. Bush’s approval varied from 92% to 19%. I suppose you’d have to measure the mean of their popularity through their term.
The advertisers probably do it because the mere mention of “Obama” grabs peoples’ attention.
Like they say, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Would you say the democrats up for reelection on this last election knew what they were doing?
While I understand how you trust the people paid massive amounts of money more than the internet, you can’t deny that many, if not most, of the Democrat candidates who went out of their way to distance themselves from Obama lost. This is kind of like watching hundreds of consecutive NASA rockets explode in launch, then saying “Yeah, but look at all the college these astrophysicists went through - they’ve got to be right.”
With that said, what’s possible is that the Democrats in the red and purple states were screwed no matter what they did, and if they’d associated themselves with Obama, they would have lost by an even bigger margin.
No, I get them constantly as well. Partly I think it’s just because Obama is a recognizable, powerful name - tons of ads say the same things, just replace Obama with “Warren Buffet” or “This Stock Market Billionaire”.
adaher’s Prisoner Dilemma theory is also possible - no single candidate could have struck out on their own, but they could have had a more positive result if they all did. The strategies for individual web browsers (many of whom don’t vote or know anything about politics and just recognize “Obama”) is very different to large-scale elections.
Fred Thompson thinks you should get a reverse mortgage.
That is factually untrue. I, and many others, benefited from the first-time homebuyer credit of $7,500 when i bought a home in 2008 and that legislation was passed during the Bush administration. The credit was marketed to all potential homebuyers as a way to save money on a home purchase. During the Bush administration, they also passed legislation enabling borrowers to deduct mortgage insurance premiums as an itemized deduction in addition to mortgage interest. This helped many borrowers that did not put down 20% on the purchase of their home recoup some of the costs associated with the mortgage insurance. Whether these programs were as beneficial as HARP, the homeowner affordable refinance program passed after the mortgage crisis during the Obama administration, which are what the ads that the OP mentioned are referring to is up for debate, but it is incorrect to state that the Bush administration did not have any initiatives targeted to help the average homebuyer or homeowner.
You do realize that that thread title evokes an image with certain unfortunate implications . . .
I’m not aware of those implications… The reference is to magic spells, where supposedly reciting the name of a powerful being could add some of that being’s power to the spell. Which is, basically, what these advertisers are doing, minus the supernatural elements.
I don’t take the same significance away from the ads mentioned in the OP–they don’t necessarily turn on approval of Obama, indeed, the ads for many could be effective by evoking spite, “time to take advantage of whatever that idiot’s doing to make homes too easy to buy.”
The spike in his popularity is definitely looking real now, if still small: he’s up to 43.7% in the RCP average.