Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED - CELLINI SENTENCED TO YEAR AND A DAY *** Question of the day
Next Post: *** IMPORTANT: UPDATED x1 *** SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* This is the first negative ad by Tammy Duckworth. Rate it…
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:10 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED - CELLINI SENTENCED TO YEAR AND A DAY *** Question of the day
Next Post: *** IMPORTANT: UPDATED x1 *** SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I like the contrast approach but think the message gets a little lost by the quirky music in the background. She may have been better served with a starker contrast in the music once it flipped negative. Instead it was kind of quirky.
I also didn’t care for the kitchen sink tactic at the end that just threw 4-5 headlines out there- like “raising taxes on the middle class.” That one may have needed a little explaining.
Comment by Boone's is Back Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:14 pm
It’s a good start, but I wonder what she’s been waiting for? The negatives on this guy write themselves. He’s got more baggage than Samsonite.
Comment by reformer Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:26 pm
What proof is there that Tammy Duckworth will be a bipartisan Congresswoman? She’s never been elected to public office. Granted, I’m sure she worked with legislators and staffs on both sides of the aisle when she was with the Illinois and U.S. Departments of Veterans Affairs, but that is a much different role than one of a legislator.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:46 pm
I liked it…simple, to the point, but yes, the music is a bit overwhelming
Comment by former state employee Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:47 pm
Good. Right key and with good contrasts in simplified form. It could have been much more strident, but seemed simply straightforward.
I liked the bunch of headlines at the end — but I know that they are true and I needed no explanation.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:47 pm
that video of walsh makes him look like a professor in a room on a movie screen with the sound off. not really that great. like other democrats this cycle she’s running on her story, not anything about how she’d govern or any kind of record.
Comment by Shore Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 2:52 pm
I hate mixed message ads.
I liked the opening part with Tammy’s accomplishments and background so I wish they would have just run 30 seconds on Tammy and what positions/programs/legislation she is for besides just being for being bipartisan, whatever that means.
The Walsh hit part of the ad is weak sauce IMO. This guy has so many crazy wack job soundbites and the worst they can say about him is he’s “too partisan”? Rewatching the ad a second time I guess they got in a “too extreme” in there but it still seems like they could have done something better than Walsh gesturing in a lecture hall and headlines superimposed over it, like actually using Walsh soundbites and saying Joe Walsh’s name earlier in the spot rather than just “he.”
Finally, apologies to the voice announcer on this ad, but I don’t really like his voice. I feel like it should be a female voice talking about how extreme Joe Walsh is.
The soft-and-fuzzy bio Walsh commercial that he’s been running seems a lot better than this ad (haven’t seen a single Duckworth ad on TV so far here in the city but I don’t live in the district so maybe they’re just wiser with their money.
This concludes today’s installment of HGF & Ebert.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 3:13 pm
I like it ,but no need to show Joe’s silly face.
The world knows Joe’s a jerk no need to pile on.
Comment by mokenavince Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 4:30 pm
bipartisan, where has that got us in the last four years.
Comment by Tobor Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 4:40 pm
Nobody is going to believe the “he’ll raise taxes on the middle class” charge right after she says he is a tea party type. That dog don’t hunt, Tammy.
Comment by Responsa Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 4:43 pm
I agree that the voiceover on Walsh takes away the effect. It doesn’t seem like a very lethal hit on him.
One more thought. Duckworth is still in the military. Isn’t she doing the same thing Kinzinger was accused of doing–using images in uniform as the primary depiction of the candidate? This is a violation of the DOD prohibition on partisan political action.
Comment by Charlie Foxtrot Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 4:54 pm
===That dog don’t hunt===
So, eliminating the mortgage deduction won’t be a middle class tax hike?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 5:01 pm
Rich–pardon me, but I thought we were critiquing just the ad itself and how undecided voters might respond to the specific ad as crafted. She didn’t mention that the mortgage deduction “might” be eliminated as part of a bi-partisan tax reform. She said Walsh “would” raise taxes on the middle class. I think that since most people definitely define the tea party as “not tax raisers”, her charge sounds iffy, is not explained, and therefore is ineffective in this ad. Hey, I calls ‘em as I sees ‘em!
Comment by Responsa Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 5:26 pm
It’s a good ad, but I tend to agree on the contrast ad.
Better to run a positive ad and a negative ad in a 50/50 rotation.
And pick one Negative and just hammer it home.
I’d go with “Wants to raise taxes on the Middle Class and cut medicare and social security for retirees. Why? So he can give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas and multi-millionaires who keep their money in the Cayman Islands.”
BTW, you don’t see many suburban candidates embracing Food Stamps. Good for Tammy.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 7:47 pm
Not everyone has a mortgage. Furthermore the taxpayer should not be subsidizing the mortgage for a second, summer home or anything else.
Making an allowance for deductions as proposed by the candidate is worth considering. That way you achieve progressiveness by setting a maximum size of the deduction.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Thursday, Oct 4, 12 @ 9:11 pm