It’s a scenario that Republicans hope will sway voters in November’s midterm elections.
A new ad by the GOP Senate nominee in Illinois is capitalizing on the GOP’s messaging this summer to warn voters that new Internal Revenue Service funding approved by Democrats will lead to overzealous IRS agents targeting middle class Americans over their taxes.
“We love the new house, but we have a little problem with the agent. All of them,” say actors portraying a couple sitting on the couch, as their home is invaded by IRS agents, in the first general election TV commercial by Kathy Salvi. […]
The commercial shows the actors portraying the IRS agents combing through the couple’s, searching for unreported income, including finding 64 cents under a couch cushion and two dollars in winning lottery tickets.
“At least we have the election to fire Tammy Duckworth,” the actors say.
Salvi, an attorney and former Lake County assistant public defender, faces a steep climb in her long shot bid in the blue state of Illinois to upset Duckworth, a first term senator and former congresswoman who lost both of her legs while serving in combat as a U.S. Army helicopter pilot in the Iraq War. Salvi’s campaign says that the spot, which it shared first with Fox News on Friday, will run statewide in Illinois, and is backed by a high six-figures ad buy.
Following the introduction of a national abortion ban this week by GOP Senator Lindsey Graham, Kathy Salvi — the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate seat held by Tammy Duckworth — has refused to reveal where she stands on the proposal that could rip bodily autonomy from millions of women in Illinois.
In the past, Salvi has come out in favor of a total abortion ban with no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. She’s even gone so far as to call these instances “hypotheticals.” But now, she refuses to let Illinoisans know where she stands on a very real proposal to establish the ban she previously supported.
Senator Duckworth, a champion for women’s rights both in Washington and here in Illinois, is working to enshrine reproductive rights into federal law and came out in forceful opposition to the ban immediately after it was introduced.
Illinoisans have made clear their strong support for protecting abortion access, so Salvi’s trying desperately to dodge her own extremist anti-choice views. But voters deserve an answer as to whether she would support this new proposal, which would strip women of their access to critical reproductive care — and which could become law if Republicans take back the Senate.
As a U.S. Senator, would Kathy Salvi vote in favor of Republicans’ national abortion ban? Illinoisans deserve to know.
59 Comments
- South side cubs fan - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:04 am:
This conservative narrative re the outrage of 87,000 IRS agents seems like such a nothingburger to me. Who cares? Don’t cheat on your taxes and you’ll be fine.
=== which it shared first with Fox News on Friday, will run statewide in Illinois ===
Of course, she shared with Fox first. I give it a C+. It will resonate with some in her party but is easily disproven. If Duckworth even wants to swat at that fly.
When Salvi’s best chance to try to rally a win is a phony IRS thingy that not only has been debunked, the folks who believe it should already be in her camp.
This ad does nothing in its design or work product that helps.
Plus.. the quality, images, “acting”, the ad… it’s not different or memorable to even start buzz.
Comical stuff. Generally, middle class families don’t sweat IRS audits because they aren’t gaming the tax code.
All these years my conservative friends have been telling me if I just obey the law I don’t have anything to worry about. Now they’re screeching about the idea that the IRS might actually enforce the laws Congress tasked it with enforcing. I’d be confused, if it wasn’t all so transparent.
Republicans demand strict enforcement of the law when it comes to immigration and BLM protests. Not so much when it comes to tax evasion. Why should better enforcement be threatening for those who oay what they owe?
- Lake Villa Township PC - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:15 am:
This 87,000 IRS agents on the prowl thing is total nonsense. Anyone who has had to wait on refunds or processing of returns lately knows this. We were selected randomly for verification for our 2020 return and had to wait over a year to get our refund because they simply don’t have enough staff to do their routine jobs.
It’s an excellent ad. No need to get your undies in a bunch and rush to trash it to prove your party loyalty. It’s not likely to do much to change the outcome. You can admit it’s a cleaver and well done contrast to the usual political ad. If you can’t see it than maybe it’s time to lay off the coolaid.
- Back to the Future - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:42 am:
Be forewarned, I am a big fan of Tammy Duckworth.
Laughed at the ashes on the agents head line too.
I like the humor.
It doesn’t move the needle for me, but keeps your attention.
Grade on the Ad- - B
D-. Most voters don’t know how many IRS agents there are, so they have no idea if 87,000 is a lot or not. Also, enforcing the law is pretty popular, as Republicans have noticed on other issues. Most voters want a crackdown on ultrawealthy tax cheats. Production is fine, she’s not going to lose votes because of it, but no meaningful impact.
B. It’s a funny spoof ad. This is probably an issue mostly for people who are already supporting her, but it could swing some undecided voters that are not aware of why the agents are being hired.
Typical Republican playbook. No, those IRS agents are going to make you middle-class tax cheats pay, not us wealthy and uber-wealthy tax cheats pay. What’s that? You don’t cheat on your taxes? Er, um, government overreach (or some other such nonsense).
===Be forewarned, I am a big fan of Tammy Duckworth.===
And a big fan of Jesse Sullivan? This I’ll never understand.
===It’s an excellent ad. No need to get your undies in a bunch and rush to trash it to prove your party loyalty.===
And this is why I did. Hilarious.
If you trash the ad for being disingenuous, your showing some sort of party loyalty.
Campaigns don’t run ads for the amusement of anyone, they run ads to be effective in message and drive turnout in one way or another to maximize a win for their candidate.
“Undies in a bunch” is the in-law uncle take that “yeah, it might not be wholly true and stuff, but you don’t like it because the Democrat Party can’t see any humor”
No. It’s effective to amuse those already swayed. It’s helpful to claim the libs are wrong.
I find it amusing in a human case study type way, undies neither bunched or not.
I don’t know what’s worse. The fact that the Republicans are running this IRS agent nonsense or that people are believing it. For context, they are hiring 87,000 general employees over 10 years to replace 50,000 anticipated retirements. Most of the money is going to technology upgrades. This will bring them to HW Bush era levels of staffing.
While I totally disagree with the IRS thing, it’s not bad. At least it is different. Get tired of all the negative ads using horrible grainy photos and doom-filled voice overs.
This is so tiresome. Every time Rich posts a GOP add that makes a clean hit, the majority of commenters don’t rate it and just complain about it or call it a lie. Clearly they polled and this was the top hit. These things don’t happen in a vacuum.
What’s hiding in this puppy? Honesty’s ashes. Well… it’s a B when it comes to the ad. It is comical. People will notice it. Is it an over-the-top hyperbolic lie? Yes.
Middle income families generally pay their taxes with each paycheck, a little at a time over the entire year. Very hard to cheat on your taxes that way, especially with the limits on SALT and other deductions.
87,000 new auditors are needed to find the cheaters. If you don’t cheat on your taxes, you should be applauding this effort, not attacking it.
==If you can’t see it than maybe it’s time to lay off the coolaid.==
Or maybe humor is often subjective and people of good faith can nonetheless find the same thing “funny” or “not funny”. I’d invite you to articulate the criteria that makes this- or any other- ad objectively funny, but I’m reminded of the old quote:
“Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few are interested, and the frog dies of it.”
= what is not true about the hiring of 87,000 IRS agents =
Because they’re not hiring 87,000 agents. The money will be used to hire STAFF, and it’s a maintenance number, to replace people who have or will leave. And the hiring will take place over several years.
B - Good production values, amusing tone, and a concise (though arguably misleading) message. Salvi is a relative unknown to many, so she is best served by piggybacking on voter unrest and attempting to ride the tide (if it exists) of under-informed voter opinion in on Election Day. However, without more vitriol, this sort of ad depends on her opponent being disliked and vulnerable, as most folks tend to like their own Reps/Senators. Still, for the limitations she has, it’s something.
Rate it an A. Has slick production value - novel/comical for a political ad - has a familiar theme (GEICO insurance ads). Connects well with voters as no one like the IRS. Great way to get her name out.
- Louis G Atsaves - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:29 am:
A cute and funny political ad? How dare she/snark.
- Louis G Atsaves - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:29 am:
The falsehood of hiring 87k agents aside, this is trying to send the message that those agents would be coming after the middle class, which doesn’t even pass the sniff test. Why bother going to the trouble of trying to go after the small frys when the big tax evasion is happening from the rich? And as has already been pointed out, if people are obeying the law they have nothing to worry about.
If anything this ad is sending the message that if you’re middle class the IRS is only going to find the change in your sofa, so they won’t bother with you.
Oswego Troll, undies in a bunch is not a dog whistle. It’s a common expression. Not everything GOP is garbage and not everything Dem is perfect. Your obtuse posting is little more than background nonsense at this point.
It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that unless their personal identity is so wrapped up in their partisan affiliation that they’ve lost perspective.
===“Undies in a bunch” is the in-law uncle take that “yeah, it might not be wholly true and stuff, but you don’t like it because the Democrat Party can’t see any humor”===
If you think your in-law uncle converses in dog whistles, that’s on you, the real comedy is such an ignorant and ridiculous phrase is being used to try to knock down criticism that includes being wholly disingenuous.
If you can’t read, maybe critiquing another’s words might be something to reconsider.
===everything===
Yeah, ‘bout that.
Using “always”, “everything”, “never” or “nothing” and other words like that, those are simpleton words used when you have no argument to thoughts,
===objective person can concede to that unless their personal identity is so wrapped up in their partisan affiliation that they’ve lost perspective.===
Objectively it’s wholly dishonest and phony, but told in a fairy-tale silly so the simpleton thinking can feel “seen”.
Like I said, I love this ad. It’s so telling… even the Counselor - Louis G Atsaves - gave it an A+
“It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that”
Tell that to the Franklin guy above:
“It’s not likely to do much to change the outcome.”
Maybe people are just defining it differently, but funny and entertaining doesn’t make a good political ad if it doesn’t change anyone’s mind. You know you’re in trouble when fox news is saying things like “faces a steep climb in her long shot bid”.
Honestly when I saw the headline I didn’t even remember who Kathy Salvi was.
I give it an A- for comedic effort; it’s cute and refreshing given the doom-and-gloom-voiceover and grainy black and white images we’re usually inundated with.
However, it’s a very solid D on any actual facts. Other than the number of people being hired, everything else is twisted into a lie, including why those 87k hires are happening and what they’re going to be doing.
You’re welcome to return to the comment section of your local TV news station.
==Every time Rich posts a GOP add that makes a clean hit==
It is a clean hit? The “87,000 new agents” thing has been thoroughly debunked. Is a lie OK so long as it makes you laugh?
==Clearly they polled and this was the top hit.==
Is that that clear? In my experience, even major campaigns poll much less than you think. I can’t imagine that underfunded also-rans like Salvi get to poll every ad.
==Maybe people are just defining it differently, but funny and entertaining doesn’t make a good political ad if it doesn’t change anyone’s mind. ==
Yeah, this. It’s weird that the predominant opinion of this ad appears to be “It’s funny, but it won’t change the election and the 87,000 agents thing is a lie” and the conservatives are all like “NOOOOO, YOU MUST ADMIT THAT THIS IS A BRILIANT POLITICAL AD”.
I’m not sure that they’ve correctly identified which panties are in a bunch.
“It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that”
Only for ginning-up the base.
It is a good ad in that it mimics funny Geico spots. However, it is too clever for itself and makes the IRS agents out to be a keystone cop squad of bumblers.
If I am an undecided or undercommitted voter, this ad doesn’t make me fear the IRS much. It doesn’t even rile me up enough to go and see what Sen. Duckworth actually voted on.
Call it stupid, but it filled up the comments here with folks who probably weren’t thinking that much about Kathy Salvi before today…if you’re a candidate in her position, this is exactly the type of thing that you need to get attention. Even when she loses, she can still say she ran an innovative campaign if she keeps up stuff like this.
- West Side the Best Side - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:48 pm:
After “I’m Kathy Salvi and I approved this message” I was waiting for “Live from New York….” So for comedic value I’d give it an A. For political value maybe a C because people who appreciated the comedic value might think, at least she’s not a raving lunatic like Boebert or Greene.
Imagine this same ad but showing a bunch of cops coming in someone’s house and the family complaining about a senator who voted to increase police funding. I don’t think that would get the same reception.
So I guess Salvi stands in opposition to law enforcement?
I give it an A-. Funny, fast moving, clear message. However, the ad gives more mention to Duckworth, so that’s a negative for candidate Salvi, who is not as well known.
- South side cubs fan - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:04 am:
This conservative narrative re the outrage of 87,000 IRS agents seems like such a nothingburger to me. Who cares? Don’t cheat on your taxes and you’ll be fine.
- A Well-Regulated Commenter - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:05 am:
F-, well-produced but you could not intentionally make a less impactful ad. This has to be a joke.
- Highland IL - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:07 am:
=== which it shared first with Fox News on Friday, will run statewide in Illinois ===
Of course, she shared with Fox first. I give it a C+. It will resonate with some in her party but is easily disproven. If Duckworth even wants to swat at that fly.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:11 am:
It’s a C-
“Why?”
When Salvi’s best chance to try to rally a win is a phony IRS thingy that not only has been debunked, the folks who believe it should already be in her camp.
This ad does nothing in its design or work product that helps.
Plus.. the quality, images, “acting”, the ad… it’s not different or memorable to even start buzz.
C-
- Demoralized - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:12 am:
I don’t like the Salvi ad because its just filled with more hyperbole and lies. Another example of things being misrepresented.
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:12 am:
Comical stuff. Generally, middle class families don’t sweat IRS audits because they aren’t gaming the tax code.
All these years my conservative friends have been telling me if I just obey the law I don’t have anything to worry about. Now they’re screeching about the idea that the IRS might actually enforce the laws Congress tasked it with enforcing. I’d be confused, if it wasn’t all so transparent.
- anon2 - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:14 am:
Republicans demand strict enforcement of the law when it comes to immigration and BLM protests. Not so much when it comes to tax evasion. Why should better enforcement be threatening for those who oay what they owe?
- Lake Villa Township PC - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:15 am:
D All republicans know is fearmongering.
- Ron Burgundy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:17 am:
This 87,000 IRS agents on the prowl thing is total nonsense. Anyone who has had to wait on refunds or processing of returns lately knows this. We were selected randomly for verification for our 2020 return and had to wait over a year to get our refund because they simply don’t have enough staff to do their routine jobs.
- BarryRumack - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:18 am:
This is good. Very good.
- Steve Rogers - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:19 am:
I’d give a D, because its her first general election ad and doesn’t introduce Salvi at all. This is just a 30 second sitcom.
- Curious citizen - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:21 am:
This spot is HILARIOUS! It’s like an SNL spoof of a campaign ad.
Which means it won’t sway anyone’s mind, so I give it a D.
And how many people in the state will see it with a “high six-figures ad buy”?
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:21 am:
lol
This ad is the type of “test” you’d give to your in-law uncle to see how far he is into the cult, and if there’s any hope for him to be saved.
The more one “enjoys” this ad, the less chance they can be saved from the clutches of the cult.
In that prism, it’s arguably one of the funniest ads we will get to see, and the joke is on those praising it?
lol
- Demoralized - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:21 am:
==This is good. Very good.==
Only if you are a completely misinformed rube.
- Jibba - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:25 am:
Falsehoods are more palatable and effective when presented with humor instead of dark lighting and ominous narration, but they are still falsehoods.
- Arsenal - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:25 am:
But like, when the ashes fell on the dude’s head, I laughed.
- Franklin - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:35 am:
It’s an excellent ad. No need to get your undies in a bunch and rush to trash it to prove your party loyalty. It’s not likely to do much to change the outcome. You can admit it’s a cleaver and well done contrast to the usual political ad. If you can’t see it than maybe it’s time to lay off the coolaid.
- Back to the Future - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:42 am:
Be forewarned, I am a big fan of Tammy Duckworth.
Laughed at the ashes on the agents head line too.
I like the humor.
It doesn’t move the needle for me, but keeps your attention.
Grade on the Ad- - B
- vern - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:45 am:
D-. Most voters don’t know how many IRS agents there are, so they have no idea if 87,000 is a lot or not. Also, enforcing the law is pretty popular, as Republicans have noticed on other issues. Most voters want a crackdown on ultrawealthy tax cheats. Production is fine, she’s not going to lose votes because of it, but no meaningful impact.
- AFSCME Steward - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:46 am:
B. It’s a funny spoof ad. This is probably an issue mostly for people who are already supporting her, but it could swing some undecided voters that are not aware of why the agents are being hired.
- Techie - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:50 am:
Typical Republican playbook. No, those IRS agents are going to make you middle-class tax cheats pay, not us wealthy and uber-wealthy tax cheats pay. What’s that? You don’t cheat on your taxes? Er, um, government overreach (or some other such nonsense).
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:50 am:
===Be forewarned, I am a big fan of Tammy Duckworth.===
And a big fan of Jesse Sullivan? This I’ll never understand.
===It’s an excellent ad. No need to get your undies in a bunch and rush to trash it to prove your party loyalty.===
And this is why I did. Hilarious.
If you trash the ad for being disingenuous, your showing some sort of party loyalty.
Campaigns don’t run ads for the amusement of anyone, they run ads to be effective in message and drive turnout in one way or another to maximize a win for their candidate.
“Undies in a bunch” is the in-law uncle take that “yeah, it might not be wholly true and stuff, but you don’t like it because the Democrat Party can’t see any humor”
No. It’s effective to amuse those already swayed. It’s helpful to claim the libs are wrong.
I find it amusing in a human case study type way, undies neither bunched or not.
- Nuke The Whales - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:51 am:
I don’t know what’s worse. The fact that the Republicans are running this IRS agent nonsense or that people are believing it. For context, they are hiring 87,000 general employees over 10 years to replace 50,000 anticipated retirements. Most of the money is going to technology upgrades. This will bring them to HW Bush era levels of staffing.
- Anonymous 103 - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:55 am:
While I totally disagree with the IRS thing, it’s not bad. At least it is different. Get tired of all the negative ads using horrible grainy photos and doom-filled voice overs.
- DuPage - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 10:56 am:
That looks like a comedy skit. I don’t think it is going to change anyone’s vote, but it might help with name recognition in some future race.
- Hahaha - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:00 am:
This is so tiresome. Every time Rich posts a GOP add that makes a clean hit, the majority of commenters don’t rate it and just complain about it or call it a lie. Clearly they polled and this was the top hit. These things don’t happen in a vacuum.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:01 am:
===it might help with name recognition===
Salvi was asked, and recruited to run, specifically, because she has name ID in old GOP Circles.
- don the legend - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:01 am:
Maybe Beetle Bailey should run this ad since we know farmers pay way to much in taxes. /s
- Flying Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:02 am:
“Clearly that polled”
Then release the poll. Oh, if you find comments tiresome this probably ain’t the site for you.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:04 am:
===clean hit===
If you’re a purveyor of alternative facts, LOL
I rated it, even explained why I rated it, flat out fibs notwithstanding.
I truly love this ad. The tells…
- Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:06 am:
What’s hiding in this puppy? Honesty’s ashes. Well… it’s a B when it comes to the ad. It is comical. People will notice it. Is it an over-the-top hyperbolic lie? Yes.
- rtov - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:06 am:
I may have missed it, but what is not true about the hiring of 87,000 IRS agents? No snark, seriously asking.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:10 am:
GOP proposes to defund the IRS.
Middle income families generally pay their taxes with each paycheck, a little at a time over the entire year. Very hard to cheat on your taxes that way, especially with the limits on SALT and other deductions.
87,000 new auditors are needed to find the cheaters. If you don’t cheat on your taxes, you should be applauding this effort, not attacking it.
- Arsenal - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:12 am:
==If you can’t see it than maybe it’s time to lay off the coolaid.==
Or maybe humor is often subjective and people of good faith can nonetheless find the same thing “funny” or “not funny”. I’d invite you to articulate the criteria that makes this- or any other- ad objectively funny, but I’m reminded of the old quote:
“Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few are interested, and the frog dies of it.”
- Roadrager - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:15 am:
==You can admit it’s a cleaver==
But first, let me axe you something.
- JoanP - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:16 am:
= what is not true about the hiring of 87,000 IRS agents =
Because they’re not hiring 87,000 agents. The money will be used to hire STAFF, and it’s a maintenance number, to replace people who have or will leave. And the hiring will take place over several years.
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:18 am:
F.
The last time the IRS checked my return, they found a rounding error I made on one of my forms, and sent me $1.
I’m not too worried about the IRS finding unreported income, because I report my income.
- FormerILSIP - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:26 am:
B - Good production values, amusing tone, and a concise (though arguably misleading) message. Salvi is a relative unknown to many, so she is best served by piggybacking on voter unrest and attempting to ride the tide (if it exists) of under-informed voter opinion in on Election Day. However, without more vitriol, this sort of ad depends on her opponent being disliked and vulnerable, as most folks tend to like their own Reps/Senators. Still, for the limitations she has, it’s something.
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:27 am:
Rate it an A. Has slick production value - novel/comical for a political ad - has a familiar theme (GEICO insurance ads). Connects well with voters as no one like the IRS. Great way to get her name out.
- Louis G Atsaves - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:29 am:
A cute and funny political ad? How dare she/snark.
- Louis G Atsaves - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:29 am:
Sorry. My rating for this one? A+
- Last Bull Moose - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:30 am:
I give this ad an F. The form is good, but it sets up the Republicans as te party of tax cheats. Counter ads could be devastating.
- The Velvet Frog - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:31 am:
The falsehood of hiring 87k agents aside, this is trying to send the message that those agents would be coming after the middle class, which doesn’t even pass the sniff test. Why bother going to the trouble of trying to go after the small frys when the big tax evasion is happening from the rich? And as has already been pointed out, if people are obeying the law they have nothing to worry about.
If anything this ad is sending the message that if you’re middle class the IRS is only going to find the change in your sofa, so they won’t bother with you.
- Franklin - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:39 am:
Oswego Troll, undies in a bunch is not a dog whistle. It’s a common expression. Not everything GOP is garbage and not everything Dem is perfect. Your obtuse posting is little more than background nonsense at this point.
It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that unless their personal identity is so wrapped up in their partisan affiliation that they’ve lost perspective.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:46 am:
===undies in a bunch is not a dog whistle.===
LOL
What I wrote, friend, is this…
===“Undies in a bunch” is the in-law uncle take that “yeah, it might not be wholly true and stuff, but you don’t like it because the Democrat Party can’t see any humor”===
If you think your in-law uncle converses in dog whistles, that’s on you, the real comedy is such an ignorant and ridiculous phrase is being used to try to knock down criticism that includes being wholly disingenuous.
If you can’t read, maybe critiquing another’s words might be something to reconsider.
===everything===
Yeah, ‘bout that.
Using “always”, “everything”, “never” or “nothing” and other words like that, those are simpleton words used when you have no argument to thoughts,
===objective person can concede to that unless their personal identity is so wrapped up in their partisan affiliation that they’ve lost perspective.===
Objectively it’s wholly dishonest and phony, but told in a fairy-tale silly so the simpleton thinking can feel “seen”.
Like I said, I love this ad. It’s so telling… even the Counselor - Louis G Atsaves - gave it an A+
- The Velvet Frog - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:46 am:
“It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that”
Tell that to the Franklin guy above:
“It’s not likely to do much to change the outcome.”
Maybe people are just defining it differently, but funny and entertaining doesn’t make a good political ad if it doesn’t change anyone’s mind. You know you’re in trouble when fox news is saying things like “faces a steep climb in her long shot bid”.
Honestly when I saw the headline I didn’t even remember who Kathy Salvi was.
- Leap Day William - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 11:58 am:
I give it an A- for comedic effort; it’s cute and refreshing given the doom-and-gloom-voiceover and grainy black and white images we’re usually inundated with.
However, it’s a very solid D on any actual facts. Other than the number of people being hired, everything else is twisted into a lie, including why those 87k hires are happening and what they’re going to be doing.
- Arsenal - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:00 pm:
==This is so tiresome.==
You’re welcome to return to the comment section of your local TV news station.
==Every time Rich posts a GOP add that makes a clean hit==
It is a clean hit? The “87,000 new agents” thing has been thoroughly debunked. Is a lie OK so long as it makes you laugh?
==Clearly they polled and this was the top hit.==
Is that that clear? In my experience, even major campaigns poll much less than you think. I can’t imagine that underfunded also-rans like Salvi get to poll every ad.
- Drury's Missing Clock - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:04 pm:
Looking at Salvi’s fundraising numbers I assume we’ll be grading the sound of trees falling in the woods next.
- Arsenal - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:08 pm:
==Maybe people are just defining it differently, but funny and entertaining doesn’t make a good political ad if it doesn’t change anyone’s mind. ==
Yeah, this. It’s weird that the predominant opinion of this ad appears to be “It’s funny, but it won’t change the election and the 87,000 agents thing is a lie” and the conservatives are all like “NOOOOO, YOU MUST ADMIT THAT THIS IS A BRILIANT POLITICAL AD”.
I’m not sure that they’ve correctly identified which panties are in a bunch.
- Proud Sucker - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:11 pm:
“It’s a good political ad. Any objective person can concede to that”
Only for ginning-up the base.
It is a good ad in that it mimics funny Geico spots. However, it is too clever for itself and makes the IRS agents out to be a keystone cop squad of bumblers.
If I am an undecided or undercommitted voter, this ad doesn’t make me fear the IRS much. It doesn’t even rile me up enough to go and see what Sen. Duckworth actually voted on.
C-
- JS Mill - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:13 pm:
I rate the ad a D. Funny but dishonest.
Unlike others, I values honesty and integrity over comedy.
- Frumpy White Guy - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:15 pm:
Terrible ad. Seems like the republicans are trying to turn federal agents into the enemy.
- NIU Grad - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:24 pm:
“Only if you are a completely misinformed rube.”
I think that’s the idea.
Call it stupid, but it filled up the comments here with folks who probably weren’t thinking that much about Kathy Salvi before today…if you’re a candidate in her position, this is exactly the type of thing that you need to get attention. Even when she loses, she can still say she ran an innovative campaign if she keeps up stuff like this.
- West Side the Best Side - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:48 pm:
After “I’m Kathy Salvi and I approved this message” I was waiting for “Live from New York….” So for comedic value I’d give it an A. For political value maybe a C because people who appreciated the comedic value might think, at least she’s not a raving lunatic like Boebert or Greene.
- The Velvet Frog - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 12:50 pm:
Imagine this same ad but showing a bunch of cops coming in someone’s house and the family complaining about a senator who voted to increase police funding. I don’t think that would get the same reception.
So I guess Salvi stands in opposition to law enforcement?
- Nellie Fox - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 1:23 pm:
I give it an A-. Funny, fast moving, clear message. However, the ad gives more mention to Duckworth, so that’s a negative for candidate Salvi, who is not as well known.
- Arsenal - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 1:56 pm:
==Call it stupid, but it filled up the comments here==
“Rate the ad” posts usually do numbers on here, though. We are…not a typical audience.
- Walker - Friday, Sep 16, 22 @ 3:03 pm:
Funny and quick. B+
Noted that the text headline was straight up false, but the voice used different words which might pass