Beginning well before Labor Day, Sixth District congressional candidate Sean Casten’s campaign has placed a substantial cable TV & digital ad buy to counter false, negative ads being run by Peter Roskam and a Super PAC associated with House Speaker Paul Ryan. Today, the Casten campaign released their ad and the following statement:
“We’re proud that we’re in a position to offer voters the truth about Sean’s record as a successful green-energy entrepreneur who’s put thousands of people to work while fighting pollution and climate-change,” said Greg Bales, Campaign Manager for Sean Casten. “The ad features Charlie Bayless, one of the Directors of the Board Sean reported to, setting the record straight on Casten’s record of creating jobs and protecting his employees during their time working together for a clean energy company.”
Bales said that the new Casten ad would be seen on cable TV systems and digital platforms across the 6th District beginning on August 22nd and characterized the buy as “substantial.”
“It’s sad that Roskam has so little to say about his 25 years in public office that he can only throw mud at his challenger, and his ads are a complete distortion, as pointed out by Crain’s and the Better Government Association,” Bales said. “Now, with our first TV ad, voters will get the facts about Sean’s exemplary business record.”
So far in the general election, Roskam and his allies have spent millions of dollars on mailings, TV and digital ads. Yet, in the last two weeks, two different organizations that predict the outcomes of congressional races have moved the Illinois 6th District race from “leans Republican” to “toss up.”
What an amateurish ad, in multiple ways. First, you don’t start on defense. Hate trump all you want, but his strength was never responding to attacks, he just counter punched. Carsten is spending 15 valuable seconds in Roskam’s narrative.
Second, the quality of the graphics and voice over in the second half makes it feel like they ran out of money half way through.
Not too hot for all the reasons mentioned above. This is a district that was drawn to concentrate Republicans to weaken their presence in the districts around it. The women in this district have plenty of disdain for Donald Trump, and they’re willing to teach their party a lesson. In the last election which was a true blue wave, Roskam won handily. The women vote punished Trump, but locally came home. That will likely happen again.
Interesting in the NBC poll yesterday that Rauner with 40% is still ahead in the collar counties. That would include DuPage, where a higher state income tax and local property taxes is all the voters there are talking about.
Roskam is a very skilled debater. There are people who aren’t thrilled with him who will still vote for him (he may lead the world in that category). Look for some separation soon in this race as they appear together. The D’s would have been far better off had one of the women in that primary won. Casten was a gift.
=Roskam is a very skilled debater. There are people who aren’t thrilled with him who will still vote for him (he may lead the world in that category).=
You greatly underestimate the sentiment in the 6th district. Roskam may be the skilled debater you claim him to be but it’s largely now lost on his constituents who he refuse to engage in debate with. I’m not saying that he’s going to lose, but to suggest that he wins by double digits is tone deaf to what’s occurring in the district. And having Helene Walsh on the ticket in much of that district certainly won’t help his cause.
===Roskam wins this one by double digits. Watch.===
Lol. I’ll take the under.
- k3_spfld_chi - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:17 am:
The ad isn’t terrible but it really isn’t good. Casten is kind of the Jason Plummer of the Democrats where they are building upon business experience with his dad. Casten and Plummer will continue to run for office until they get elected to something small enough.
People aren’t happy about Casten’s abortion is like gall bladder surgery comment. Some people out here may be pro-choice, but they aren’t nearly as far left wing as he is on abortion. That may’ve hurt him.
I’m no expert on this race, but it strikes me as a little bit odd that the ad leads with how Casten saved his own company from a “hostile takeover.” Doesn’t seem like a very persuasive point. Am I missing something?
Grade C-. That ad looks like a compromise that was made by the people on the creative team who wanted to go with a warm positive ad, and the people in the room who wanted to go with a hit piece. This is the result. Neither faction succeeded. Was a lesson learned?
===The women vote punished Trump, but locally came home. That will likely happen again.===
Last time, they could register their disapproval of Trump by voting against him, while voting for Roskam as a check on a likely President Clinton. This time around, the only way to register disapproval of Trump (and to place a check on him) is to vote for Casten. Big difference between ‘16 and ‘18.
- New to the Game - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:31 pm:
I rate it a D - By the reading of comments of you know a lot more about campaigns than I do. So maybe I incorrect in thinking that I rule #1 is - “If you are explaining your opponents attacks on you, then you are losing”
- Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:33 pm:
For me, the ad was effective. It was a counter to the Roskam attack ad. Roskam is losing my vote. Not decided yet but leaning Casten.
I have seen enough deals to know that some investors will use lawsuits to strengthen their negotiating positions. Some of these have merit and some don’t. Casten’s accuser does not appear to have won, so there may not have been much meat there.
60611 could very well be right (excellent analysis, btw), but that NBC poll of generic party preference would suggest otherwise. We’ll see.
- New to the Game - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:38 pm:
Sorry for the repeat - I hit Say it! button accidentally too soon.
I rate it a D - Reading the comments most of you know a lot more about campaigns than I do. So maybe I am incorrect in thinking that rule #1 is - “If you are explaining your opponents attacks on you, then you are losing”
I hear more explaining about why Roskam’s add is incorrect than introducing Casten as a candidate. Blending the negative immediately after seems odd.
OK, Sling, Mr JM, and 47, you’re on. But this way. The 3 of you can have a beer with Rich if I lose. I know how to get him the scratch to cover the (better than you usually drink) beer money.
If I win…y’all just come on the blog and say I was correct.
No more people in on this wager which I think doesn’t break any laws. Just my biggest supporters.
This ad is awful. Well let me restate that. I liked the first ad even though it was defensive (seconds 0-20) and I liked the second ad (less) in that it highlighted the pants on fire rating. But the combination was God awful and confusing. I expected more from a campaign run by Greg Bales.
=With due respect Rich…they’re paying attention in the 6th.=
Precisely why Roskam is in trouble. He’s been able to count on the fact that people haven’t been paying attention. Once they started to it became very obvious that Roskam wasn’t holding up under scrutiny and his answer has been to avoid his constituents. His attacks on Casten are nothing more than an effort to deflect from his own record. Couple that with being seen as an enabler of the President leads me to believe that this race will be much closer than what your crystal ball is telling you.
Pun, seriously take the time to watch the Trib editorial interview link today. It’s not an intramural scrimmage any more. It’s head to head. Now they can attack each other freely, personally and in person.
Really like Casten and have since the primary. Really not into this ad. Like others said, wish it was an introduction ad… If this is the first Ad it can only get worse and we just see nothing but ads like this. Hope the campaign turns it around and they don’t go down the path of exclusively using ads like the second half of this one.
- Arsenal - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:15 am:
Boy, that ad turns on a dime.
- Unhinged - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:15 am:
Wimpy, wimpy wimpy
- Natty_B - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:20 am:
Casten gonna win
- Frank talks - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:21 am:
That was like two ads all at once
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:29 am:
Should be two spots.
Introduce yourself with the first spot, answer and attack Roskam with the second.
I assumed this dude had a lot of money. If so, no reason for this double-up approach.
- BlueDogDem - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:36 am:
Is a green energy entrepreneur the same as a free market capitalist?
- Phil King - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:38 am:
D.
What an amateurish ad, in multiple ways. First, you don’t start on defense. Hate trump all you want, but his strength was never responding to attacks, he just counter punched. Carsten is spending 15 valuable seconds in Roskam’s narrative.
Second, the quality of the graphics and voice over in the second half makes it feel like they ran out of money half way through.
- slow down - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:45 am:
I think it’s effective in countering the attack and painting Roskam as deceptive.
That said, he would be well served to be running a separate biographical ad introducing himself to voters.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:50 am:
Yikes.
It’s two ads mashed together to seem like one clear string.
All the good that you saw in the first part… is forgotten with the 2nd ad attached to the first ad.
Not good.
- NeroWithTheBadHair - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:54 am:
A few thoughts-
This would have been better as a 2nd/3rd ad. First ad should be purely biographical.
I also don’t like how he crammed two vastly different mini-ads into one advertisement. Negative and positive ads should be completely separate.
- FoodNetworWatcher - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:58 am:
It counters the negatives and puts him in a positive light at the same time. Not bad. (But also not great)
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 10:20 am:
Not too hot for all the reasons mentioned above. This is a district that was drawn to concentrate Republicans to weaken their presence in the districts around it. The women in this district have plenty of disdain for Donald Trump, and they’re willing to teach their party a lesson. In the last election which was a true blue wave, Roskam won handily. The women vote punished Trump, but locally came home. That will likely happen again.
Interesting in the NBC poll yesterday that Rauner with 40% is still ahead in the collar counties. That would include DuPage, where a higher state income tax and local property taxes is all the voters there are talking about.
Roskam is a very skilled debater. There are people who aren’t thrilled with him who will still vote for him (he may lead the world in that category). Look for some separation soon in this race as they appear together. The D’s would have been far better off had one of the women in that primary won. Casten was a gift.
Roskam wins this one by double digits. Watch.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 10:33 am:
=Roskam is a very skilled debater. There are people who aren’t thrilled with him who will still vote for him (he may lead the world in that category).=
You greatly underestimate the sentiment in the 6th district. Roskam may be the skilled debater you claim him to be but it’s largely now lost on his constituents who he refuse to engage in debate with. I’m not saying that he’s going to lose, but to suggest that he wins by double digits is tone deaf to what’s occurring in the district. And having Helene Walsh on the ticket in much of that district certainly won’t help his cause.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 10:37 am:
===Roskam is a very skilled debater===
This ain’t a presidential race. Most people don’t usually watch those congressional debates.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 10:37 am:
===Roskam wins this one by double digits. Watch.===
Lol. I’ll take the under.
- k3_spfld_chi - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:17 am:
The ad isn’t terrible but it really isn’t good. Casten is kind of the Jason Plummer of the Democrats where they are building upon business experience with his dad. Casten and Plummer will continue to run for office until they get elected to something small enough.
- Anon316 - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:28 am:
People aren’t happy about Casten’s abortion is like gall bladder surgery comment. Some people out here may be pro-choice, but they aren’t nearly as far left wing as he is on abortion. That may’ve hurt him.
- LC Illini - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:34 am:
I’m no expert on this race, but it strikes me as a little bit odd that the ad leads with how Casten saved his own company from a “hostile takeover.” Doesn’t seem like a very persuasive point. Am I missing something?
- @misterjayem - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:51 am:
If anybody can get in on this, I’m good for twenty bucks.
– MrJM
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 11:53 am:
===Roskam wins this one by double digits. Watch.===
Percentage points or votes?
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:12 pm:
Not good. People need to know who you are first, rather than trying to introduce yourself through the lens of your opponents’ narrative of you.
- Responsa - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:14 pm:
Grade C-. That ad looks like a compromise that was made by the people on the creative team who wanted to go with a warm positive ad, and the people in the room who wanted to go with a hit piece. This is the result. Neither faction succeeded. Was a lesson learned?
- 60611 - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:22 pm:
===The women vote punished Trump, but locally came home. That will likely happen again.===
Last time, they could register their disapproval of Trump by voting against him, while voting for Roskam as a check on a likely President Clinton. This time around, the only way to register disapproval of Trump (and to place a check on him) is to vote for Casten. Big difference between ‘16 and ‘18.
- New to the Game - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:31 pm:
I rate it a D - By the reading of comments of you know a lot more about campaigns than I do. So maybe I incorrect in thinking that I rule #1 is - “If you are explaining your opponents attacks on you, then you are losing”
- Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:33 pm:
For me, the ad was effective. It was a counter to the Roskam attack ad. Roskam is losing my vote. Not decided yet but leaning Casten.
I have seen enough deals to know that some investors will use lawsuits to strengthen their negotiating positions. Some of these have merit and some don’t. Casten’s accuser does not appear to have won, so there may not have been much meat there.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:37 pm:
60611 could very well be right (excellent analysis, btw), but that NBC poll of generic party preference would suggest otherwise. We’ll see.
- New to the Game - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:38 pm:
Sorry for the repeat - I hit Say it! button accidentally too soon.
I rate it a D - Reading the comments most of you know a lot more about campaigns than I do. So maybe I am incorrect in thinking that rule #1 is - “If you are explaining your opponents attacks on you, then you are losing”
I hear more explaining about why Roskam’s add is incorrect than introducing Casten as a candidate. Blending the negative immediately after seems odd.
- DuPage - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 12:40 pm:
I would be surprised if Roskam does not win. The only previous time it was close was when Tammy Duckworth was running against him.
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 1:00 pm:
==- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 10:37 am:
===Roskam is a very skilled debater===
This ain’t a presidential race. Most people don’t usually watch those congressional debates.===
With due respect Rich…they’re paying attention in the 6th.
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 1:05 pm:
OK, Sling, Mr JM, and 47, you’re on. But this way. The 3 of you can have a beer with Rich if I lose. I know how to get him the scratch to cover the (better than you usually drink) beer money.
If I win…y’all just come on the blog and say I was correct.
No more people in on this wager which I think doesn’t break any laws. Just my biggest supporters.
- Precinct Captain - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 1:14 pm:
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 1:00 pm:
Care to pay for a poll about it?
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 1:33 pm:
PC, No. Only one poll will matter.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 2:23 pm:
This ad is awful. Well let me restate that. I liked the first ad even though it was defensive (seconds 0-20) and I liked the second ad (less) in that it highlighted the pants on fire rating. But the combination was God awful and confusing. I expected more from a campaign run by Greg Bales.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 2:37 pm:
=With due respect Rich…they’re paying attention in the 6th.=
Precisely why Roskam is in trouble. He’s been able to count on the fact that people haven’t been paying attention. Once they started to it became very obvious that Roskam wasn’t holding up under scrutiny and his answer has been to avoid his constituents. His attacks on Casten are nothing more than an effort to deflect from his own record. Couple that with being seen as an enabler of the President leads me to believe that this race will be much closer than what your crystal ball is telling you.
- A guy - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 4:09 pm:
Pun, seriously take the time to watch the Trib editorial interview link today. It’s not an intramural scrimmage any more. It’s head to head. Now they can attack each other freely, personally and in person.
Neither has refrained from attacking the other.
- Pundent - Wednesday, Aug 22, 18 @ 9:03 pm:
Saw it. And Casten’s comments on how long it’s been since Roskam had a town hall resonated.
- AL - Thursday, Aug 23, 18 @ 9:50 am:
Really like Casten and have since the primary. Really not into this ad. Like others said, wish it was an introduction ad… If this is the first Ad it can only get worse and we just see nothing but ads like this. Hope the campaign turns it around and they don’t go down the path of exclusively using ads like the second half of this one.