I’ve made a strong effort to avoid television and radio the past month, because I just can’t stand the bullshit that’s being broadcast. You’re never going to get the whole truth from a 30 second soundbite! The people who sponsor those ads have no interest in the truth. The only interest they have is getting your vote. Every time I hear about “job killing taxes” or the “failed stimulus” I just want to scream “CITE?!” at the top of my lungs.
I have heard (no cite for this) that most negative attack ads are actually not designed so much to get you to vote for the other guy, as they are to get you to not vote at all. I.e., it’s not so much that they want, “What?! He supports baby-raping?! I’m voting for his opponent!” as they want, “Ugh, I’m sick of the mud-slinging. These guys are both crooks. I’m staying home.”
I don’t know how true that is, or if true, how effective. I feel like I heard about this on a radio talk show discussion, likely on NPR, but I can’t remember exactly.
Did you know that Harry Reid WANTS TO GIVE VIAGRA TO CHILD RAPISTS!?!? PERSONALLY! AND THEN CHEER THEM ON FROM A DARK CORNER OF THE ROOM!?!
In many cases, the attack ads are the only sources of election info the voters are exposed to. It’ll be interesting to see how many backfire, like the one Elizabeth Dole ran against Kay Hagan in the NC Senate a couple years ago. The ad said Hagan attended an atheist conference and accepted money from them. It turned out it was one of many stops on Hagan’s canvassing tour, and the hosts at one particular stop happened to be atheist. It wasn’t an exclusive gathering of non-believers.
Dole showed so much desperation running that ad, it put off the voters.
The ads have been brutal. I wonder how much worse they can get. They give you anything but information you might find useful. The commercial breaks are dominated by a string of political ads . The networks are making a fortune with 3 to 4 billion being spent.
It’s the only source of election info that the *idiots *are exposed to. Non-idiots go in search of information, they don’t sit in their lazyboys waiting to be *exposed *to it.
I would have expected something different. I think that the attack ads fire up the base and get them to vote when they otherwise wouldn’t bother. In other words, they aren’t intended to change anyone’s mind. Of course, sometimes they do backfire as Knowed Out noted.
I feel compelled to link Dan Carlin’s podcast on this topic. His theory is that we are all so cynical that the softer attack ads just aren’t effective anymore. Political ads HAVE to be harsher now-a-days or we just tune them out. Can’t say as I always agree with his take on politics, but it’s definitely an interesting listen:
http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php/csarchive/Show-186---The-Cynicism-Defense/Generation-X-campaign
Fixed typo in thread title.
I always wondered how many people do this. Is it enough to justify the cost of placing it in so many commercial breaks? I just can’t stand how much money must be spent with these ads.
It’s worse than that. HE ALREADY DID!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek:
Frankly, I find the claim that “I am not a witch” to be very persuasive.
I WILL NEVER GIVE MONEY TO A POLITICIAN BECAUSE OF THIS
The 5 or 10 or 100 dollars you give to your favorite candidate goes to the ad agencies and the TV station owners.
I don’t want to enrich any of these folks.
David
Now that, courtesy of satellite and cable packages that feature network stations from two or three time zones letting us see Michigan and NY ads on the Pacific coast and vice versa, will people recognize that the identical ‘awmaigawd, incumbent Jones and PELOSI dip themselves in butter and roll around in Obamacare thousand dollar bills’ ads are just kick-the-incumbent boilerplate? If Local Candidate is just one of many Antichristi, I’m probably not going to see him as a terribly distinctive threat to my precious bodily fluids.
I would like to this time to personally thank Directv for making me one of the .03% who didn’t get network stations. 13 years of no political adds except for presidential. They let me know I can now get locals in august and I said HELL NO until after november 2nd.
NANCY PELOSI! Tax cuts for the rich! Wall Street Bankers! Obama! Elitist!! NANCY PELOSI!!! Social Security Reformist! ___ Drove Us Into The Ditch!! Harry Reid! Donations from Secret Foreign Powers! Unions! ___Agenda! NANCY PELOSI! :eek:
:mad::eek:
Just about one more day of this horse slop, thankfully.
Worked on me. I am now convinced, thanks to Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland that his opponent John Kasich is nothing but Wall Street scum. I voted for Strickland last time out but since he has done nothing in this campaign but run attack ads targeting Kasich (and pose for pictures with Bill Clinton) I conclude that there are no reasons to actually vote for Strickland. So, a pox on both candidates (since Dems enthusiastic enough to vote are supposed to be in short supply, Strickland’s strategy would appear to have backfire potential).
There’s one race locally in which the attack ads have persuaded me to vote for the attackee. For the past couple months there have been periodic mailings accusing this woman of being a tax-raising, community-destroying Antichrist. Fair enough (:dubious:), but none of the mailings saw fit to identify either the office she was running for or her opponent. It turns out she is a candidate for state senate, normally worth a small yawn but the target of this nonsense is going to get my vote due to the sheer stupidity of the dumbass running against her.
I look forward to the day when negative ads filter into consumer products.
"Do you want your family drinking a soft-drink that was derived from cocaine? Cocaine! A soft drink that police carry in the trunks of their cars to clean blood off the streets after traffic accidents? Accidents your children may have been in? A soft drink that is regularly used to end the lives of our most precious unborn citizens though home-douches? A soft-drink that will eat a galvanized nail into nothing overnight?
Coca-cola. Wrong for America.
We’re Pepsi, and we approve this ad."
“Pepsi. For when they don’t have Coke.”
I wish there was a “none of the above” option. I mean a viable option, not the third-party or Green candidate, who is most assuredly not going to get enough votes. I mean that if enough people don’t vote for them and do vote against them, they have to go pick up trash on the highways for a certain number of hours equal to the time their stupid negative ads were broadcast.
Yes, well, one of the bugfeatures of democracy is that idiots get to vote too. That’s why the ads exist.