9.08.2008

Obama Needs Better Ads

One of the more disappointing elements of the Obama campaign has been their advertising, which has tended to focus on fairly conventional, 30-second, issue-based spots. Their ads have been neither creative nor attention-grabbing, in contrast to both their reputation for being a media-savvy campaign, and some of the relatively creative spots put together by the McCain team.

I suspect that the next 2-3 weeks are probably the most important point in the campaign for advertising. Once the debates begin, it will probably be too late to fundamentally redefine either the candidate's message or the opponent. And advertising is difficult in the two-week home stretch between the debates and the election, with campaigns usually constrained to conventional biographical spots or hail mary negative attacks. So now is the time for the Obama campaign to go all out and spend some of those hundreds of millions of dollars in donations they have collected.

In that spirit, here are two Obama ads that I'd like to see.

Firstly, I think they need some sort of hit on Sarah Palin. But it can't be too personal. The whole point is to portray her as a conventional and perhaps somewhat corrupt and provincial politician, and break out of the sort of People Magazine / US Weekly popularity contest that has broken out. There is so much attention being paid to Palin's celebrity that she has gotten away with asserting her claim to being a reformer when there are some strong rebuttals to such things.

The easiest point of entry is probably this one: during the last four years of her tenure as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin procured more than $26 million in pork barrel projects. This translates to about $4,000 per resident of Wasilla, or about 30x the per capita rate received by a city like Boise, Idaho. Is this such a terrible thing? You decide, but it undermines her reformer image and I think makes a good 30-second talking point.

I would make this a "fun" and light-hearted ad, maybe even cartoonish and honky-tonk, with some banjo music in the background as the narrator talks about the pork that Palin has procured, with a reference thrown in to her initial support for the Bridge to Nowhere. This is more along the lines of an ad you'd usually see in a Senate campaign rather than a Presidential one, but I think Obama needs to break the mold a bit.

The other campaign I'd do is not one ad but a series of them. During the final night of Democratic Convention in Denver, the Obama campaign had seven or eight 'ordinary' people speak to the assembled crowd at Invesco Field. They were working class, middle-aged white and Hispanic voters, who conveniently all happened to be from swing states. But they were actually pretty persuasive, and produced some of the more moving moments of the convention:



So I would put together five or six of these spots, featuring these people or people like them speaking directly to camera, with interspersed images of their hometowns and their families, reserving 5 seconds at the end for a few phrases on blackscreen:

"The Obama Economic Plan"
"Tax Cuts for Working Families"
"5 Million New Green Energy Jobs"
"Health Care for Every American"
"The Change That We Need"

You get the idea. It's a little unconventional but would be buzzworthy and would seek to counter some of Palin's homespun appeal.

In any event, I'm not all that wed to either of these particular ideas, but if the Obama campaign does not begin to think outside the box a little with its advertising, I think it may find it has trouble getting the return on investment it expects.

236 comments

Geoff said...

I agree Nate that Obama has to improve his contrast messaging. Ever since Schmidt took over day to day messaging for McCain, Obama has generally been on the defensive, reactive. That must change for him to win.

jpmassar said...

Excellent ideas.

Time to yank the media off Palin.

Jason said...

I think they need to run more ads for the youth vote. The youth vote/college crowd can really put Obama over the top in some swing states if they actually vote.

I had an idea of them doing several ads with Cheryl Crow's "A change will do you good" song playing in the background and have some of the 18-25 voters say in the spots why they are going to vote Obama. Why he is the "change that will do them good". They could run these particular ads on MTV/VH1/CMT/ESPN/Comedy Central ect. I think these could be VERY effective.

Joel said...

Two words: Errol Morris.

BeanoCook said...

Amazing that you Dems can't see the big picture. Palin is the #2. Keep wasting your time on her and ignoring McCain, you are sure to lose.

Ali said...

I love the Average Joe speakers at the Dem Convention: specially Pam from NC who said, " I cannot afford 4 more years like this, I cannot do it...that is why I am supporting Barack Obama as MY President", and
Barney from IN.
The line, "I want a Government that works for Barney Smith instead for Smith Barney" was killer quote.

PeteyPowderBlue said...

"if the Obama campaign does not begin to think outside the box a little with its advertising, I think it may find it has trouble getting the return on investment it expects."

Dude. The Obama campaign hasn't done a single thing out of the box in the past 20 months.

Why do you expect them to start now?

none said...

Focus on character. The election will not be won just on issues. Obama needs ads that destroy the credibility of McCain and the GOP. Show them for the flip-flopping, say anything to win, unprincipled people they are.

Eg. McCain says "Country First". Who is in McCain's Country ? Not the middle class. Not the veterans. McCain's country is the rich, the oil companies, and the big corporations. McCain's message needs to be reframed like this.

McCain says: I will fight for you. For this, Barbara Boxer's comments are a great to re-frame this:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/6/34821/39471

McCain says: I'm a maverick and tries to use his previous record of oposing the administration. Show the flip-flops from him.

McCain wants people to forget that the GOP ruled for the last 8 years. Use the clip from the daily show that shows how similar his speech is to bush. The same promisses as 8 years ago. The same people. We will get the same results.

There needs to be a new attack showing "Why Not to Vote for McCain-Palin" irrespective of their policies, every day for 2 weeks.

Anthony said...

How about just advertising more? In Nevada, I'm seeing two McCain ads for every Obama ad. I even see McCain ads on the Discovery channel and other non-traditional channels (e.g. outside of the news and prime time shows).

Also, Obama's ads seem to consist mostly of self-incriminating stuff (McCain admits he doesn't know as much about the economy as he should) and staying on message (eliminate tax cuts for 250K+), while McCain's ads seem to be the traditional republican message (dirty tax and spend liberal elitest who will eat your babies). Guess which one evokes a larger emotional reaction (in either direction)? The McCain ad!

Up until Palin/RNC, I had this feeling that McCain was playing checkers and Obama was playing chess. Now I'm beginning to think that the roles have reversed.

Jason said...

In my opinion Palin is the most direct reason McCain got such a big bounce after his convention. And with the media going ga ga over her I think it would be a HUGE mistake for Obama to keep ignoring her. Yeah she is the #2 but you wouldn't think so with the way the media is framing this election right now. I have a hard time thinking if Romney was the VP pick that McCain would have gotten such a huge bounce and all this media frenzy.

Matthew said...

I wanna see an ad with the graphic that compares Obama's and McCain's tax proposals.

dailydem said...

I don't want Obama to shill as you are describing. His ads seem 'traditional' because they are different from McSame's. The last thing we need him to do is cave into Washington politics. As soon as we go back to theme spots we will be cast as vague; Obama needs to keep with the classy specific spots.

Mauricio said...

Couldn't agree more. They all have been pretty lame.

I was especially deflated when I saw the 'how many houses' spot. Started off allright, but ended with '...but this is a house we can't let him in' with shot of the WH was such a downer. Cmon BHO, time to start punching.

This week's remarks on the trail were encouraging: 'you can't just make stuff up' and so on. Hopefully some of that forcefulness will start showing in the ads too.

BTW, I think the whole 'they are liars' would be a great line of attack. There is sooo much evidence now and Barack has a unique ability to explain it without boring people. And it undermines McCain's whole hero/values/honor personna while changing the narrative on Palin.

One last thing: I have seen the same 'Obama's smile/change we can believe' web ad sooo many times. We really need like 10 variations of that one. Why not one shooting hoops? Another at the senate? One on one with supporters?

RL said...

A simpler attack on Palin, focusing on the corruption: she was a director of Ted Stevens's 527, she's under investigation for ethics violations, and she puts known sexual harassers in charge of public safety.
Or a simpler attack on Palin's economic record: she left a town of 9000 people $20 million in debt. (This despite hiring a Washington lobbyist to get earmarks.)

A simpler point of contrast with McCain: just find a way to shorten Cartwrightdale's ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBfngOsvmA0
And perhaps close with Bob Casey's phrase, "He's not a maverick, he's a sidekick."

dc said...

I agree Nate. Did you see the Daily Show's comparison of McCain's acceptance speech with Bush's? The passages pledging change are nearly word-for-word identical. Play them side-by-side, it'll diffuse some of McCain's convention bounce, as well as further tying him to Bush.

And taking down Palin has actually been made easier because of the Repub's approach. Quite simply, they've made her into somewhat of a messianic figure. This is exactly what Obama fought off...why?
Because all you have to do is show the world she's no superhero, she's just another politician. That was Hillary's most successful approach against Obama. Use clips of her speaking, contradicting herself, her own hand writing praising the earmarks she claims to stand against. Have people from her small town telling the truth about her real record. Having people from her own town going against her, strips away their 'elitist defense'.
Show the world she's no 'pta-hockey-mom', rather, she's just another self-serving politician.

There are enough clips out there of both McCain and Palin contradicting their current platforms. Take the Daily Show approach, run the clips in ads. It'll show that they'll say anything to get elected, and hit at their new 'change' platform.

yiannis said...

obama needs negative ads. his wimpy/lofty attitude is getting on my nerves.

then again it did last year...

Jason said...

I definitely agree.

I think he also needs push the judgment issue and get mccain on his heels about the decision to pick Palin. I would have an ad showing an interview with an old corp. executive and with a some young attractive lady showing her resume (6 colleges in 6 years, ran a local fruit stand, never traveled, but knows how to cook a mean pork chop!). The ad would suggest it was a 15 minute interview and then it would say "You're perfect for VP of this company!" in some sarcastic, yet ludicrious way that suggest "What the hell is he thinking?" I would end it by saying "is this the type of judgment you want for your next president while showing 3 or 4 older republican females that were more qualified.

This would provide the campaign an indirect way of calling a spade a spade.

footstep said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Gilesdemon said...

I don't know here in Michigan has been a couple of really creative and i think potentially devastating ads on McCain from the Obama side.

One as been the Same AD. Now, it is oridinary ad until the end when it has McCain saying "I voted with the President over 90% of the time higher than quite a few Republicans...." That quote there is just damning if you are struggling in the Bush USA.

The second one is a lot more creative....it comes on with a split screen with a McCain quote on the right side saying that he doesn;t know as much about the economy as he should. The music starts (sung to the tune of I don't know much History)

I'm not up on the economy
Don't know much about industry
Really can't explain the price of gas
or what has happened to the middle class

(cut to a full screen photo of McCain and Bush smiling from ear to ear)

But I know one plus one is two

(cut to the the McCain/Bush hug)

And if I could be just like you
What a wonderful world this would be

(cut to Bush and McCain walking with their backs to the photographer going into the White house)

Narrator: Do we really need 4 more years of the same tune?

footstep said...

The coverage from The Daily Show and Colbert Report during the four days of the RNC convention did such a fantastic job of highlighting Republican hypocrisy and double standards, that the attempts of the Obama camp pale in comparison. I would urge team Obama to watch that coverage - there is enough material there to give them a 20 point lead. The fact that the GOP gets away with such blatant hypocricy is as much a testament to what the Dems let them get away with as how amoral their side has become. If the Dems had had a parallel convention (Ron Paul) or had a candidate that got his geography wrong (McCain) or was drowning in pork (Palin) etc, etc, don't you think the GOP and media would portray them as going down the tube. For many Americans, and the media, the GOP is innocent until proven guilty, while the Dems are guilty until proven innocent. It is an unfortunate mindset.

Simon said...

Like the idea of the regular people ads. Not sure about the Palin pork ad, but then again, one of Obama's big problems this race has been not enough attention getting and too few risks.

Yes, a risk can sink your campaign. It was easy for McCain to take risks because he was losing. The downside was the same as the status quo.

Now Obama is losing and he needs to recognize the same cost/benefit analysis.

Wilson said...

Yeah i agree about the ads. Unfortunatly we will most likely loose this one again due to bad management.

They need to attack so bad, espically when the other side is so weak. But Obama is sitting back on only hte issues. Why can't Bidon or others stand up and call them liars?

Will Larsen said...

IN the spirit of websavviness, which Obama seems to be all about, why not make an entirely user-created ad campaign? Make it a youtube contest or something, people love that shit. Would be a hell of a way to attract media attention away from Palin, which right now is hurting the Dems.

OzJohnnie said...

Nate;

I think you are largely right about BO needing new ads. The adds you suggest are good in that they strike the populist theme that BO was pushing to success back in Feb. I doubt the populist route is available to him anymore, however.

I suspect that the next 2-3 weeks are probably the most important point in the campaign for advertising. Once the debates begin, it will probably be too late to fundamentally redefine either the candidate's message or the opponent.

This statement may be where you are wrong. With the conventions done, and done so late in the cycle, I think that the "framing of the candidates" is complete. From this point on the messages have to be either A) promotion of a candidate's vision, or B) hacking at an opponent's vision. The time has passed for "framing" an opponent's image (and Palin's image, whether you like it or not, has been framed already by her speech in the face of hysterical Sullivan lead smears. (a quick thank you to those around here that contributed to the frenzy))

The main problem with your recommended ads, I think, is that they fit with your underlying campaign strategy and not BO's. What is BO's? Can you describe it? I can describe McCain's. And that is the fundamental problem with BO. How does he plan on winning - on closing the deal?

Ads won't help. He needs a strategy to counter McCain's new populism of reforming Washington. McCain is going the "Mr. Smith" route. Americans love that stuff. What's BO going to do?

Oz.

Natalie said...

I've been trying to get my campaign guys to do a "Change Corps" thing where the campaign does volunteer work in the community.

eleandil said...

Mr. Obama knows how to handle bullies. Let's all just chill and let him do just that. Reaction shows fear...Nate, I'm dissapointed to hear such from such a logical thinker as yourself. The forests are very dry, please be careful with the matches...the mold covered branches of yesterday are drying out and waiting for a spark. Get it?

Natalie said...

I always thought the Internet would have saved Kerry's cookies if he had only listened to it.

sg said...

First, as I and many others (Matt Cooper, TalkLeft,...) have suggested:
Ignore Palin. Doing an ad on Palin's earmarks (vs. something McCain has done) seems like fighting the wrong battle.

That having been said, I don't think focusing on earmarks is good in any event.

Too much blowback:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13205.html

I don't know if it's true, but the McCain campaign claims Obama has requested $1 million PER WORKING DAY of earmarks. It makes Palin's stuff look like pocketchange.

Also, it doesn't contrast well with McCain who doesn't request earmarks AT ALL.

I think that's a MAJOR landmine.

But I like your other idea.

Regardless, the ads need to be funnier. Humor is lacking in Obama ads.

Matt said...

Baboom!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-07-poll_N.htm

McCain has 10 point lead over Obama in USAToday likely voter poll.

Trouble...

Jason said...

You guys are right about the Daily Show stuff from last week. That stuff was so spot on is was really eye opening and comedy gold at the same time.
I wonder if some of Obama's "creative team" are Daily Show fans? I would hope they are and I hope they got a few ideas or borrow some of them at least.

Smitty said...

Gilesdemon, the split screen ad has been playing here in my state, too...a swing state. I REALLY like that ad. I can be busy with other things and the tune will grab my attention. I still stop and watch that ad.

And that is the big key...very few of the Obama campaign ads grab attention.

I, too, would recommend the Obama campaign ad department take note of the great work on the Daily Show and the Colbert Report.

dc said...

And Obama/Biden should also change their 'he voted with Bush 90% of the time' approach.

Math turns the public off, remember Gore's 'the top 1%' tactic.

Simplify and sharpen all attacks. 'He voted with Bush ALMOST EVERY SINGLE TIME'...take the math out of it.

'Unless you're a multi-millionaire, under our plan, you will pay less taxes and get more money back. And if you are a multi-millionaire who doesn't even know how many houses you own, then change is coming'.

Simplify and Sharpen.

Remember the saying: 'No one ever got rich overestimating the American public'...I give you Palin as exhibit A.

Emily said...

Eleandil: "Mr. Obama knows how to handle bullies. Let's all just chill and let him do just that."

I second that. C'mon guys. We're hyperventilating here, all the while forgetting that Obama and co. are intellegent people.

I do agree with Nate though, that some more creative advertising is necessary--there is waaaaay too much attention on Palin these days, its getting nauseating.

Ben said...

I really liked this video, and I hope it shows up sometime soon as a real TV spot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpniuotfpR8

On an unrelated note, I just stumbled upon this site today, and all the analysis certainly has me interested. I'm curious, though, if it has a proven track record that you can point to from previous elections. Was it around in 2000/2004, and if so, how did it do, and how much time prior to the election did it arrive at the (presumably) correct prediction?

gatiss.1 said...

Obama still needs to define "change" for a lot of people. Whenever I run across an undecided voter, that's usually their single biggest complaint about Obama. Obama's acceptance speech did a good job of filling in more details on the change message, but they need to get more of that out there. Not everyone is Internet-savvy enough to find it for themselves. (I'd argue that there are probably more undecided voters in non-Internet-savvy category.) Clips of the speech with a voiceover and some text hitting the points would probably do the trick.

I think this is more important than tying Bush to McCain or hitting back at Palin at this point. Obama needs to outline his plans to the voters just starting to tune in to the election because that's what undecided voters and persuadable voters want to hear.

Eri said...

My thoughts exactly. It is actually frustrating, but it's not surprising either, because they let that happen toward the end of the primaries as well; they let Hillary control the narrative, and they repeatedly do so to McCain since the nomination was settled. Which makes me very concerned.

>Matthew

A couple of months ago CNN did a great job crunching the candidates' tax plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fbxpMw4mco

I have been wondering since then why they just can't do something like this in their ads. Make it a piece of simple visual info in a way easily understandable to average voters. As often pointed out, American electorate is mostly not a bunch of smart, thinking people, and talking about numbers alone just sounds abstract to them.

And they should create ads that call them on their blatant lies and hit them hard. Why don't they directly call McCain/Palin liars as they are? That's nothing to degrade you. It's just the fact.


>Mauricio

I felt exactly the same way about "but this is a house we can't let him in." The guy who created that ad just doesn't get it. The first time I saw that ad I was fully expecting it to conclude by pointing out how "out of touch" McCain is. What the heck? It sure was a downer.

And finally. I liked the "They must think you are stupid" line Obama said this weekend in IN. But his overall tone (his repeated "Ha!") sounded too dismissive and tired. Am I alone? That instantly reminded me of Gore's repeated sighs in the 2000 debate. And it just didn't feel energetic. Plus, it's not Obama's job to attack Palin. It's Biden's. That must change.

Will Walker said...

Didn't the keating 5 scandal have to do with housing? Shots of old news clips after McCain got caught.

Imply that McCain is back to his old tricks. Blame mcCain-bush for the housing crisis.

The closing line: "We just can't trust McCain with our future."

Hit him on his credibility gap-people understand that he and Palin are lying on the stump. Just reinforce the message that he can't be trusted. Hell, I don't trust him.

Smitty said...

Ben - this is a projection site, not a prediction site.

The site is new this year. During the primary season, it was the most reliable site.

Emily said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Emily said...

Ben. Check out the FAQ page where there is a ton of info on how the info of this site is compiled and what makes it a reliable source of info. And FYI, while 538 wasn't around in 2004, Nate has a pretty good track record with baseball stats projections using similar methodology on Baseball Prspectus. Plus the site has been cited several times on MSNBC and CNN.

PS...Things get really interesting when we have a nice set of state polls to digest

Kit Stolz said...

Agree that predictability is hurting the effectiveness of Obama's advertising. Not sure about focusing on Palin: she deserves scrutiny, but there's something bizarre about running ads that target a mayor of a tiny little town when she's a governor running on a presidential ticket. I can hear the undecided wondering: why? What does that prove?

infinityorzero said...

I would go after the "America First" theme and question McCain's decisions.

Run clips of both McCain and Obama saying that the first priority in picking a VP is their ability to be President. VO: "McCain and Obama agree". Play Palin saying she needs someone to explain what VP does. Shots of LBJ, Ford, Truman being sworn in, re-run Palin's quote in VO. (Great idea, Nate.) Run McCain again. Tag line: Which comes first Senator McCain? America? Or abandoning your beliefs to get elected?

Contrast Senator McCain and candidate McCain. Clip espousing immigration bill. Clip saying he would veto it. Bush tax cuts are immoral. Will make them permanent, etc. Tag line: Which comes first Senator McCain? America? Or abandoning your beliefs to get elected?

Smitty said...

I've alway thought Obama's desire to avoid the typical, cynical campaign ads could easily be accomplished by using the humorous comparisons we watch on The Daily Show and the Colbert Report.

As mentioned above, Obama is saying, "you can't make this stuff up!" He was at his best during the primaries using humor.

One time on CSPAN I caught the last part of an Obama event...very, very small (for him). An older gentleman asked him what change meant. I loved the answer Obama gave. "Do you know the names of George Bush's cabinet secretaries, other than Secretary of Defense or Department of Justice? See, that's the thing. Everyone should know who these people are. That is something I plan to change because these are the people who make decisions that affect you."

Smitty said...

Obama is running against McCain for President. The press constantly asks him about Palin, but, really, he is running against McCain and he concentrates on that.

Wilson said...

Anyone know how much it costs to put an ad up? if i can get the cash for one or two runs, it might be a good start.. not promising anything..

i wuold like to see a 30 second add listing palin nad mccain talking a bout their items and we stamp a big LIE on the scree for each and explain the truth.

Jason said...

Obama needs better ads but he also needs to quickly polish up his interviewing skills. From the clips I saw from his interview today on Stephanopoulos he was pretty rough. I'm not talking about the Muslim comment, just the way he was presenting himself was pretty poor. He looked really tired. That's the one drawback that Obama has, he is not a great interview and he tries to think way to much before he speaks by pausing so much. I am really concerned about this as we are in the home stretch of this election. Of course this won't change my vote..but it could for several people.

J said...

Smitty said...

Ben - this is a projection site, not a prediction site.

The site is new this year. During the primary season, it was the most reliable site.

-----------

Smitty, this is a Democratic cuddle fest site, not a projection site.

This site would be a lot more interesting and credible without the Democrat dribble that permeates almost every post. McCain up 10 among likely voters in the new USA Today poll but good 'ol 538 says Obama 68% of winning and 303 EVs. Stop drinking Nate's KoolAid, politics ain't baseball!

Emily said...

J said:
This site would be a lot more interesting and credible without the Democrat dribble that permeates almost every post. McCain up 10 among likely voters in the new USA Today poll but good 'ol 538 says Obama 68% of winning and 303 EVs.

Nate updates the numbers by running the simulations once daily. The USA Today poll came in too late to be included today, but will be tomorrow.

And J if you don't like the discussion, don't read it. Simple as that

malanb5 said...

I agree. It's time to take the gloves off--there is no reward for running a truthful or clean campaign. He has to knock them for changing their positions--especially McCain. You can't change your positions and message with the polls for political convenience. If McCain can steal the Change mantra and get away with calling Palin more experience than Obama then it will be the biggest hijacking and political positioning ever.

Natalie said...

Malan- If McCain does that he deserves to win.

pluckon said...

Nice ideas, Nate. But the Democratic Party in general, and the Obama campaign in particular, think that any attacks are evil. You see, we are Democrats and we do not take the offensive. Our purpose is to be attacked, and to lose elections.

Natalie said...

McCain being up ten points strains credibility. The Palin thing is good but it's not that good. I understand that Gallup is working under time/media constraints, but I was running that poll I'd throw it in the garbage and do it again. Even if I was pretty sure I'd get the same results.

As I said in the last thread 7.5 on the bullshit-o-meter.

Bill P. said...

Thank God this site favors Democrats! With the conservative bias shown everywhere in the media - demonstrated by the current fawning over The Chosen Alaskan - it's great to have a Democratic bias somewhere. Don't like it? Go to Drudge or Freep or any one of a million other websites that serve up conservative political pornography. But kudos to you for stepping outside the right-wing scuzzball echo chamber for a bit.

Reality has a liberal bias.

eleandil said...

Emily...thanks for getting it! I agree with Nate as well that something more creative might be called for. But I also have complete faith that it's already been thought of and will be put in place when the time is right. Several times during the primaries I found myself screaming "what was he thinking"! Then after a few days realized that it was subtle payback that even his most dedicated supporters missed. That's when I put my tail between my legs and decided to trust his judgement. We have enough media blabbering as you say, let them have it to themselves. I will say one thing though. That picture of Palin and the moose is extremely disturbing. I have nothing against hunting if one actually uses what they kill to feed their family, but that's just wrong to pose for a picture in front of a bleeding animal! Especially looking like you just came from a makeover instead of a hunt. See, I can't resist either!...but let's try our best anyway.

Tbirdsfan said...

I wrote this on my Obama blog page, but I doubt they will read it. I mean Democrats know everything they need to about winning elections right?

The truth about Palin- A memo to David Plouffe:

It is now time to stop treating Sarah Palin with kid gloves. The reality is that this VP nominee is much more significant than most because of John McCain's advanced age. If McCain were to win she would have a real chance to become our next president should McCain's age catch up to him. There has been much talk about her not wanting to do interviews and campaign but this is just a Karl Rove tactic that sets a low bar for the Governor so that when she does appear in inteviews as she will in the coming week, people will be astonished at her well she speaks and it will make her look downright brilliant. Let's remember that she was television sportcaster, she knows how to talk!

The real discussion (please take note Mr. Plouffe) should be about her extreme right wing beliefs on the issues! The fact that she tells school children that the Iraq War is a "mission from God" and that her church has proclaimed that "gays should be prayed straight"needs to be addressed.We allowed the Republicans to attack Rev. Wright and Palin's church has said things WAY more controversial and abhorent. Mrs. Palin's stance on real issues will scare most Independent voters and some Republicans as well. She is against stem cell research and has voted down bills that would help support pregnant teens (like her daughter)!



I have only scratched the surface of her frightening and polarizing extremist world views, many of which are public domain and have been covered in recent days by some media outlets. However all of this must be key talking points from the campaign (ads, speeches and debates). We have heard Sen. Obama talk about Palin's hypocritical earmark stance but this is a very mundane, ordinary complaint from one politican about another. We need to start attcking her extremist views, things that make her stand out as even more right wing than Bush-Cheney, if we are going to turn swing voters against her.

If we do this we will knock her down several notches and once again expose McCain for making a monumental mistake in picking her as VP.



I fear if we do not we may regret it come the morning of November 5!


Mike Caccioppoli

pbird said...

I have been very concerned about this too, and posted a diary at Kos the other day on the lack of punch of the Obama campaign's very generic slogans and ads. "Change" -- how many hundreds of candidates have used that over the past century? To me it does not capture the uniqueness and intelligence of the candidate at all. No one else seemed to be very concerned, but ads and slogans are how a large number of Americans "learn" about the candidates. If all I knew about Obama was what I saw on TV ads, I sure wouldn't be as involved or enthusiastic as I am about electing him. (Kos post here: "Change -- too cliche for the importance of this campaign" http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/5/0424/67974/423/587405 )

interstices said...

We here in Boise only have one strip of bacon.

Matthew said...

Eri,
But then that same CNN did a ``Keepin' em' honest'' segment this week evaluating McCain's claims about Obama's tax plans. Yes, they did say those claims were false, but that was almost buried amongst the false equivalence: they emphasized that both plans would increase the deficit without noting the order of magnitude (or two) separating their respective fractional increases in the deficit.

Vinay said...

Here's how an ad needs to go: "Sarah Palin is a strong woman, a devoted mother, and a talented politician. But here's what you probably don't know about her..."

Follow up with vehement anti-abortion views, bridge to nowhere support, censorship, etc.

Simple way to keep the kid gloves on while dishing it out.

dz8jsPMDse5FvOczaQo9C1DLiq36EA-- said...

Ad 1:

[Pic of Sarah Palin]

Sarah Palin, as the Governor of Alaska, sued the government to prevent Polar Bears being listed as an endangered species.

[Pic of cute polar bear]

Why? Because it might endanger her future plans to exploit oil reserves in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

[Pic of Sarah Palin with big gun]

To support her case, she ignored or distorted the scientific evidence of rapidly dropping polar bear numbers.

Sarah Palin. Tough on Polar Bears...

[Cut to picture of John McCain, photoshopped to be as white as possible, in a swimsuit if possible.]

... and other endanger species.

Voice over in 'disclaimer' voice:

Given John McCain's history of cancer, the Obama campaign does not encourage or endorse him trying to get a tan. Consult your doctor. Side effects of a McCain presidency may include economic collapse, environmental disaster and an outbreak of wars.

Ad 2:

John McCain nominated Sarah Palin to the second most powerful position in the world, only a heart-beat away from the presidency. But he had only met her once before, and didn't appear to vet her. The vice-president is not the only position of importance that the president nominates. Who is he going to nominate to serve of the supreme court, or have access to the highest levels of government, including control of the agencies which secure our country? People he met off the street? Or is he going to pander to special interests? Who knows? Probably not even John McCain.

John McCain. Roll the dice.

Ad 3:

Sarah Palin claims to be tough on pork, but she supported $27 million in earmarks for her tiny town, and the 'bridge to nowhere'. In fact, she put Sen Stevens up to it, and then turned on him when it was politically expedient (at least in public). Just like Sen McCain and the Republicans have turned President Bush. But, well, that's politics as usual.

McCain/Palin '08. Political backstabbing, as usual.

Ad 4:

John McCain chose Sarah Palin to be his running mate, despite only having met her once. She's the governor of Alaska, and she's popular because she got big payments from big oil for everyone in her state. A windfall tax on oil profits, if you will. John McCain opposes taxes on big oil. Let's hope they can sort out that little policy difference soon.

And that's not the only different views they have. They seem to differ on earmarks, abortion, climate change, green energy, at least.

McCain/Palin '08. Two platforms for just one ticket.

Voice over in 'disclaimer' voice:

This ad contains some guesses as to the political positions of Sarah Palin. The Obama campaign has not vetted these positions. But then John McCain clearly hasn't either. Actual mileage may vary. You buy it you keep it.

Joe Perez said...

I agree with Nate that the Obama campaign's advertising has been very disappointing and totally unmemorable.

But I don't like either of Nate's suggested ads. The first one hits Palin in the wrong place. People are not reacting to Palin because of the REFORMER NARRATIVE. They're reacting on an emotional level because she's a charismatic, very likable woman. The only effective anti-Palin ad is going to have to pull on a gut-level, emotional response. Replace the liking with disliking, or at least, coolness. In my opinion, Obama has to go after her with two ads:

1. She's been an abysmal failure as a mayor, shockingly incompetent. And what does it say about McCain that he would pick such a lousy VP? Conclude with, "Is McCain a maverick or just reckless?"

and

2. She doesn't have the experience to lead. Go with a live quote of Lydia Green. Tell them that Green is the leader of the Alaska state senate. Then say that Green says: "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president? Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?" Then say: AND LYDIA GREEN IS A REPUBLICAN!!! And conclude with, "Is McCain a maverick or just reckless?"

My 2 cents

Joe Perez said...

I also have to agree with the commenter above who wrote "Obama needs better ads but he also needs to quickly polish up his interviewing skills". I'm afraid I agree.

When Obama came back from vacation, he had an off day at the faith forum. But then, he got his game back. For a while, he was punchy. He gave a big punchy speech at the convention. He got a bounce.

Then I saw Obama do O'Reilly, and it was the old Obama who showed up at the faith forum. Downbeat, overly intellectual, as agressive as a schoolgirl. If you didn't pay attention to the arguments and you just watched the tone of voice and the body language, it looked like O'Reilly beat the guy up. (Of course, that's how O'Reilly treats many of his guests. But when the guest is Obama, it makes Obama look very weak and uncommanding.)

Obama, get back that fire in your belly, man!

PalinPorky said...

How about something like this?

http://media.putfile.com/Porky-93

draNgNon said...

OK now. I gotta say. For this election I am pro-Obama and any happiness I had that McCain secured the GOP nomination evaporated with his anti-choice stance, his lack of support for the GI Bill, and his reversal on torture.

But reading this post really set off bells and alarms. I know you guys are pro-Obama too, Nate, but talking about that in this blog feels a tad out of place, and this particular post seems to be way off topic. Were you just trying to agitate the conservative readership?

Of course it's your guys' blog, but it really strikes me you're a bit outside of your own ground rules, by recommending ads in a one-sided way and, moreover, effectively embedding an Obama testimonial ad in your post.

pbird said...

Matthew said...

"I wanna see an ad with the graphic that compares Obama's and McCain's tax proposals."

Agreed! The Washington Post graphic from a few months ago is detailed and yet simple and visceral in its impact. When undecideds I encounter talk about Obama, that's what I hear most often cited: "he will raise my taxes." No one has a clue from any of the ads so far, or even from the convention, what the actual breakdown is between the two plans by income bracket.

I believe it's a waste of time obsessing on Caribou Barbie. If moderates could see how McCain will actually impact their wallet she would become entirely irrelevant.

Jason said...

"Obama, get back that fire in your belly, man!"

This is why I am worried about Obama at the debates. Which Obama is going to show up? The Obama that can control a room or the one that has to think way to much before he speaks and gets lost in his words. McCain is not any better but he might come off more believable if Obama is having a tough time saying what he wants to say and starts to have too many pauses and looks puzzled even though he isn't.

If McCain is up by 5 points or more at the time of the first debate it will be critical for Obama to shine...and I'm sad to say it but after watching that interview he had today I really have some doubts. I hope I'm wrong.

Michael said...

Well said, draNgNon. Nate, would you consider also posting suggested ad campaigns for McCain-Palin?

Tito said...

infinityorzero said...

I would go after the "America First" theme and question McCain's decisions.


I don't think he should go after it, I think he should just take the "Country First" theme and run with it, but use the phrase "America First" like you stated it.

Maybe a series of 3-5 ads spelling out individual policy issues, but strictly Obama's plan - no contrast and compare with McCain's plan. Don't even give any of McCain's ideas oxygen. Maybe mix it in with the voter bio stuff Nate was talking about, too. Just emphasize putting Americans first. Close the ads out with the powerful Obama line from his acceptance speech - "I've got news for you John McCain, we all put our country first!"

The goal would be to totally discredit McCain's "Country First" theme as something solely owned by the Republican party. I figure if McCain is gonna try to co-opt the "Change" theme, then there needs to be a forceful hit back against McCain for this ridiculous idea that he's the only one capable of putting America first.

One side note though, this idea and most of the ideas I see put forth deal with national campaign advertising. I'm a strong believer in targeting advertising on specific swing states - the DHL issue in Ohio, McCain's water gaffe in Colorado, McCain's opposition to nuclear waste in his home state would play well in Nevada, etc. State specific advertising is more expensive I'm sure, but I think the return on investment would have higher potential too.

Tito said...

Oh, and I don't give a damn about Sarah Palin anymore. If she's not even qualified to talk to the press then she's not qualified to be VP. End of story. Let's just stop giving her attention and leave her relegated to being the unknown and therefore unimportant quantity of this election.

Kali said...

Good post, interesting.

There are a few things about Sarah Palin that I can't get out of my head. One is the image from a helicopter of a man holding a rifle, shooting at a beautiful wolf running in a snowy clearing. The next scene shows a man cutting off a wolf's paw, to bring to Palin for a $50 bounty. I don't recall where I saw it because I'm on info overload. But the imagery stuck. There is nothing more powerful than disgust or fear for encoding memory (brain geeks call it LTP). When I think of Palen, this is my first association.


Something like what I saw needs to go national. Include with it images of oil spills, polar bears, and Palin's whacky church activities. And coat hangers, back alley abortions...


And it shouldn't come from Obama's people, but moveon.org and PFAW (for the church/abortion stuff) or some other 527.

Jason said...

I know this is off topic but let me ask this....
When is McCain going to do a "tough" interview by the press? Obama has had the guts to do O'Reilly and Stephanopoulos this past week but I have not seen McCain take any grilling at all.

I just think it is beyond outragious when the GOP talks about the "liberal media" but they are getting the "egg shell/kid gloves" treatment by their so called "enemy of the media". Let me guess McCain is going to go on Conan O'Brian or Jay Leno for his interviews? I know he canceled his Larry King interview because "He didn't like the way CNN treated Palin". This election is really turing into a joke in a hurry,

Kali said...

"Well said, draNgNon. Nate, would you consider also posting suggested ad campaigns for McCain-Palin?"

That will appeal to whom? If he wants to appeal to centrists and Democrats, it should be about issues.

Dems care about building up the middle class, health care, getting out of Iraq, the environment, science, and separation of church and state. Don't see how McCain could pull it off on these issues.

To appeal to his base, all he has to do is keep attacking his opponent, promise to overturn Roe v. Wade, and reminding people he's a POW. Very simple task for Republicans.

markymark said...

I disagreee with hitting Palin right now. I think maybe have a hit ad on Palin, with the less than honest parts of her convention speech mainly.

But the biggest thing I think Obama needs to do is run his own campaign, get out ahead of the curve and run some positive ads. I think something along the lines of the second ad sequence you suggest. They could be tailored to markets, so an economy based ad in Michigan, a healthcare ad somewhere with really poor health coverage, etc.

Though I do disagree that Obama's ads have not been that good. I think some have been quite effective.

GaryB said...

I like the idea of the 'Pork for Palin' add. I'd end it with the line "Sarah Palin, definitely not Kosher"

What is with the Gallup polls? They are they only polls that show a major lead for McCain. I'm sure they are the ones the McCain group will cite, but what are they doing that seems to be so favorable to McCain?

eleandil said...

You said it all "Kali". Let McCain destroy himself and appeal only to his own base. In the meantime give Obama the chance do the same...and maybe some others if we don't fall for the bait of doubt and paranoia. Once again, Obama knows what he's doing...be patient, wait and see. He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sunday.

OzJohnnie said...

The problem of the Obama campaign:

How is he going to win? What is his message? "Change"? What does that mean?

For McCain it means "taking the Maverick of the Senate and putting him in the Whitehouse." It means "You may like Sarah Palin, but I don't think Washington will". See how easy those are to remember? And credible (not to you all, of course) to the average voter who knows that McCain has been called the Maverick for years and has just found out how Barracuda behaves under fire.

What is Obama's tag? "We are the change we are waiting for"? What the hell does that mean? What does Biden add? "Mr. Foreign Policy"? Catchy? I think not.

So your/Obama's problem is that you are all thinking of ads that you think are effective, but they are almost attack ads. You know how you want to go after McCain, but you have no idea how to add the second half of the add that is needed at this point which is: What does Obama offer that is special?

This is the part of Obama's message that is lost. He doesn't know what to do know that he has won the nomination. He thought the fighting was over. He didn't "plan for the peace".

Oz.

markymark said...

Ozjohnie

Problem with your analysis is two things- 1 what does 'maverick' mean? Just like 'change' that word gets tossed around and noone really defines it. And McCains platform is as weakly defined (possibly more weakly defined) than Obama's.

2 There is an awful lot riding on Palin, and the GOP have just bought into that so much, what happens if she does come across as a lightweight eventually? I think the GOP needs to be careful putting too much hope in Palin. You just know that somewhere, somehow there will be some youtube video with her doing somethng not so great. Call it her 'bitter' moment. What happens when the penny drops and people remember that its John McCain who is the candidate?

In truth I think both sides need to define there campaigns better, especially on the economy, I don't just think that talking about tax cuts is going to do it. I think we are still talking about a very competitive election. I think both sides have spent a lot of time attacking the opponents so far, bith sides need to worry about playing the ball not the man now. What is it that electing either Obama or McCain will mean? (And by the way, its trouble for the GOP if we are worrying about Palin if everyone is talking about her as much this time next week as they are now.)

jjph said...

It would seem to me we are seeing the same patterns of the last 2 elections emerge. While I hate to say it, OZJohnnie is right about about the message. When asked about evil by the preacher, McCain said "Defeat it". We all know that means nothing, it was cynical pandering to those who actually believe "evil" is real, however we also all know that most people who heard that will remember it, and Obama's thoughtful answer was way too complicated (and yes, intelligent) to remember. So McCain wins only because he branded the issue in simple terms. See: GWB / RR

Obama's problem is he's not simple. And dare I say it, the voter is, (well maybe 51% of them anyway!) He doesn't need to attack, he just needs to say stuff like "They must think you're stupid?" every time McCain talks of Change and reform.

We all know, and that includes the smart conservative on this site, that McCain is saying anything and everything to get elected - I say this based on the way he has completely flip-flopped on most of his positions he had when he really was a maverick - but he does it in simple terms, like "here's my VP, she's a woman!". Like it or not, it worked.

IMHO said...

A couple of things:

All the polls being used have used all particpants which included non-registered voters. Now that Likely Voter models are deployed, there is no surprise the polls have shifted towards the Republicans. That is always the case.

Am I the only person who read/heard BO saying "we will not be bullied." and thought, "what a wimp? Leaders don't say 'bullied'" There is a wimp factor here and it lays where it always does - on the Democrats side.

jeannie said...

My Republican mom in Virginia voted for Obama in the primaries. I was shocked and elated.

Then, 4 days ago I called her. "I don't think I'm going to vote this year," she said.

WHAT?

Turns out the email going around with lies about Obama's tax plan really shook her. She is a retiree and all of her savings are in stocks. She is obsessed with capital gains, taxes on dividends and the inheritance tax.

"But mom! You won't see ANY changes if you make under $250,000 a year under the Obama plan! Do you make $250,000 a year??"

She laughed. "Not on your life. Can you send me some sources for that info?"

So I did. Now she is back on Team Obama.

IDEA:

Remember those little paper calculators that banks used to give out? Where you slid a card within a paper sleeve to calculate something?

How about giving out those types of calculators? It would should you the proposed effects on income tax, capital gains, estate tax and dividend tax if you vote for Obama. What would be amazing is that for the last three issues, if you picked a income bracket anywhere under $250,000 (or the capital gains on your house was under $500,000), it would say in capital letters, "NO CHANGE FROM TODAY."

Retirees are WORRIED about their savings and their estates. But they aren't online...except for email and they keep getting these emails full of crap.

Do something unexpected.

DanOregon said...

Another good ad would be a parable, A guy is using a tool (say a wrench) to try and hammer in a nail. Guy walks away and comes back with another wrench (maybe this one is touted as "new and improved") and again tries to hammer the nail. Finally, guy gets a hammer and the nail goes down in one strike. Fade out Obama-Biden '08.

eleandil said...

Oz...do you really think that anyone who wasn't already planning on voting for McCain that watched the Republican convention didn't notice how all of the sudden McCain miraculously transformed from attack dog into peaceful opponent? In fact, he was the one who made such a big deal in the first place about being civil throughout the whole process until he realized that it wasn't working for his campaign and was irritating his base even more. So what did he do, get someone else to be attack dog. Now before you say ahah! I admit Obama did the same with Biden, in fact chose his dog first. But at least Obamas dog can bite and not just bark as I'm sure we'll all see soon enough.

McCain never planned on a peacefull campaign until after the Democratic Convention, that is so obvious...and even then basically plagarised Obamas campaign. Almost everything he said about a peacefull competition was stolen word for word out of the Obama playbook. And all of the sudden McCain does this magical transformation into Mr. Nice guy overnight and the press eat it up just like they did with Palin. At least she was real, as warped as that reality is. Finally, if you watched Obamas speech in Denver and still don't get the specifics of what his idea of change is you obvioulsy were just hearing and not listening. If you didn't watch, maybe you should before asking us what it meant.

millco88 said...

The problem for Obama is how does he really attack Palin without either hurting himself or looking like part of the crowd that's attacking her. If you talk about her experience, that plays into McCain's strength versus Obama. If you talk about earmarks, once again, that plays into McCain's strength versus Obama. That's going to have be a pretty creative ad to thread the needle like that and that hasn't really been the Obama's campaign's strength.

Todd Morris said...

Well, the Daily Show is on a two week hiatus.

The Obama campaign should hire the people who put together those convention clips.

... and I'm only half joking.

Todd

markymark said...

I think this week Obama should put on a series of positive comercials. I actually think Nate is on to someting with the positive message thing, but I also think that he needs to be in them. Maybe a series of him talking ot ordinary folks.

Ad 1- Talking ot family with no healthcare, or inadequate healthcare, Obama can say 'this is what I would do for you'. End of the ad 'I am Barack Obama and I approved this message' ordinary folk 'and so do we'

Ad 2- Soldiers mom talking about the worry and fear of her son being in Iraq. Barack Obama 'Hear is what I am planning to do.' same tag at the end of the ad, though this time with soldiers mum

ad 3- family talking about being near foreclosure and worried about money, Barack talks, then same tag line.

All ads could be shot around a kitchen table, with ordinary people, not actors.

markymark said...
This post has been removed by the author.
greyzone2 said...

how about

"Real change in policy or 10% maverick - the choice is clear"

Doctor Pion said...

You are exactly right about the ads, but it is the lack of attack ads that boggle my mind. McCain has been running attack ads during the news and even during the Democratic convention.

In addition to this proposal for a John-and-Cindy version of Harry and Louise and your attack on Sarah "pork" Palin, I'd like to see

1) An attack pointing out that she is taking money from working people in (pick state) with her massive oil tax increase in Alaska. Her surplus comes from us, not from being a fiscal conservative.

1a) An attack pointing out that she spends four times as much as a drunken liberal.

2) What I would call "Palin, you are no Harry Truman". She referred to Truman as if she was as prepared as a 10-year Senator to step in and become President should McCain die next March.

3) Pick five policies that are to the EXTREME right and attack the two of them as using their celebrity status to

4) Link McCain and the S+L crisis (with the taint of big money corruption from Keating) with the current mortgage crisis (and the taint of his lobbyist connection to it).

This last one should have been in Biden's talking points on Sunday.

Toby said...

At some stage in the Battle of the Wilderness, when his army was getting an awful battering, Ulysses S. Grant was getting so much useless advice that he rounded on his generals: "I'm sick of hearing what Lee is going to do! Go back to your commands, and start thinking about what we are going to do!"

Grant was also an Illinois man by adoption so maybe Obama should take a leaf out of his book.

I have no vote in this election, but as an observer of the American scene, I yearn for an Obama victory, believing it to be for the better world, not just the USA. There is a "here we go again" depressed & defeatist tone creeping into many of the liberal blogs. Some are starting not to believe in an Obama victory.

Personally, I think things have shifted far less than people think. McCain's bounce in the polls in peaking at less than Obama's. Victory is still there for the taking.

Obama does have a Grant-like quality to keep his head when all around are losing theirs (and blaming it on him!). There has to be a trust in him to get it (at least partly) right.

However, this would be a great moment for Colin Powell to endorse Obama, if he is ever going to. It would change the whole tone of the press coverage, which is still echoing from the Republican convention. There is too long a wait until the debates; as Nate says, these are probably the crucial 2 or 3 weeks of the campaign. Some good hard-hitting ads would certainly really help.

Looking at their strategy so far, the Obama campaign will have to recognise a re-energized opposition. Taking Grant's advice, the Democrats should stop obsessing about Sarah Palin, and start to think of the new Republican strengths generically and how they can be negated, and negated with a bit of wit and humour, as Nate suggests. The Democrats will have to adopt more negative tactics (without copying Republican tropes) to drive the message home.

Trouble is: Seems the Obama campaign does not read Liberal blogs, at least according to Matt Stoller at Open Left. However, I am sure they read this one because of Nate's brilliance.

assmole said...

Time Obama threw Wanklerod under the bus.

cora said...

Obama needs to attack and go negative. But not over the petty show brought up by the GOP: Palin, Pitbulls, community organizers, blue collars, patriotism and all that cr...

The big argument he has now is Freddie Mac and Fannie Maie (I'm sure the only uttering of these names makes us tremble).
He has to explain what is going on: a repubblican administration performing the biggest nationalization EVER in the history of the USA. F&F exposures amount to 1/4 of the entire GNP. This means there will be an almost certain reflection on the american taxpayer who will take the burden of this historic flop. Also given the past 8 years of free spending while talking against big governement has produced a gigantic debt. Given these conditions there is no other way out of it than taxes, taxes, and again taxes. This is precisely why Wall Street is rejoicing: they know that however F&F has been mismanaged, however big the exposure produced there will now be a government that will pour in resources: your resources.

He has to point out the contradiction: Republican Values and Reublican Actions.

There are better arguments for attacking than Sarah Palin.

The fact that O's campaign is silent makes me confident: I think F&F and GOP's handling of the economy will turn out as the decisive battleground. They will attack huge.

OzJohnnie said...

markymark;

what does 'maverick' mean?

Well, you see, this is where McCain has such a huge advantage over Obama. Obama says, "Where's he been for 26 years?" and out comes the list: McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, Comprehensive Immigration, Gang of 12, etc, etc, etc. How long is the list where the Maverick has been sticking it to the GOP?

There is an awful lot riding on Palin, and the GOP have just bought into that so much, what happens if she does come across as a lightweight eventually?

Actually, the risk of this is low for a couple reasons:

First, she is the Alaskan Maverick. Despite her short time in the Gov's office, she has taken on and defeated just about every special interest in AK. The record, sparse though it may be, is very compelling.

Also, even if she is a complete lightweight, she only has to maintain the "farce" for two months. Odds are, especially after the stupidest nutroot-fed media frenzy in history that she'll pull it out. The media start going nuts again and common folks, who overwhelmingly (and justifiably) think she was given a raw deal by the media, will give her a lot of slack.

So, I think your view of their weaknesses is optimistic from your point of view. McCain is shielded from much criticism by his POW experience (and I know how you hate that) and now Palin is shielded from much criticism my the feeding frenzy. The have a pretty solid, and positive, framing of their base position.

McCain's pivot to "steal" Obama's message was enabled by two things: your (or your fellow traveler's) irrational desire to attack Palin in the most stupid and personal ways; and Obama's coast at the convention where they made the silly effort to pain McCain as "McSame". He's the friggin' Maverick for God's sake.

On that one I just sit in wonder as I ponder how McCain and his team must have belly laughed as they watched the Dem convention. The whole time the Dems are screaming McSame! Can't have 8 more years of Bush! And the McCain comes out in his convention and says, "I agree, do away with the last 8 years and do it with the proven agent of change - the Maverick."

It was so obvious and easy. McCain didn't steal anything. Obama gave it to him.

Oz.

OzJohnnie said...
This post has been removed by the author.
joel said...

I think Obama lost the election yesterday when he said he was a muslim. i realize it was a mistake but listening to talk radio today that`s all they will be talking about, his admission he is a muslim.
Unless McCain makes a major gaffe in the debates that shows his age I think we are looking at a decisive MCCain win, to many people are afraid to take a chance on Obama and the thought of that right wing loon a heartbeat away is scary.
Obama better do something quick or this thing will slip away from him.
By the way the usa today poll is bull but I do think right now McCain may be up 3 or 4 points.

OzJohnnie said...

joel;

He didn't admit he was a Muslim, he just gaffed the sentence (like a rookie).

The issue here isn't his religion, the issue is that on the hottest of hot button issues BO didn't watch his words. He need Stef to correct him on it.

The issue is inexperience. McCain doesn't need to even work that angle anymore because the branding has been set. The media will work it for him. Beauty, eh?

And on that point, what branding has Obama set on McCain. I'll tell you. Goose egg. Nada. Bucko.

McSame has died a death and McCain has flipped it with the Maverick. And now he is taking the message that Obama created and making it his own.

Election over.

Oz.

SunnyD said...

Can't really play the "pork" card w/ Palin because everyone's guilty. Once the McCain finally concedes Iowa, then McCain would just go after Obama's homage to the ethanol producers. Hmmm. Iowa and Illinois are the two largest corn states, and just about everyone hates the idea of ethanol.

skylights said...

I'm glad you're not wedded to those ideas, because I don't think they're that good. I think the campaign needs to take a cue from The Daily Show, which has been crucifying McCain and Palin by contrasting what they said and did before to what they say now. It's enormously effective, and hilarious to boot. These words from Mark Twain fit:

"Will a day come when the race will detect the funniness of these juvenilities and laugh at them--and by laughing at them destroy them? For your race, in its poverty, has unquestionably one really effective weapon--laughter. Power, Money, Persuasion, Supplication, Persecution--these can lift at a colossal humbug,--push it a little-- crowd it a little--weaken it a little, century by century: but only Laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of Laughter nothing can stand."

Of course, before going on the attack, it may be wise to wait a bit to see how the polls shake out when the McCain bounce inevitably subsides.

OzJohnnie said...

Speaking of all this message stealing, look at McCain's add released this morning: "The Original Mavericks". Naked, bold message theft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVIaqCjvLpU

Obama's problem in a nutshell: McCain is two steps ahead of him and running faster. Obama is continual reacting and McCain is continually setting the agenda. It started with the Berlin trip and it is only speeding up.

There is trouble in Obama-land.

Oz.

Travis said...

How about this for a Palin ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLBh6AKqEvs

DarienCrow said...

Well I get up this morning and go through the routine of checking the polling places and I now see Nate Silver is attempting to be Obama's ad man now.

Why am I not surprised?

Electoral Projections Done Right has gone so entirely left that Alan Colmes can't keep up.

But my reasons for coming to this site remain the same. I really want to see Nate Silver actually nail this election so I know who to trust when it comes to political polling.

So I'm wondering now just when will he have the stones to show that John McCain is now winning this election?

My guess is that we will get another vote... something like:

"Okay lefty visitors... I'm so confused with the numbers at this point I really need your help with this one. So I'll leave it up to you to vote on.

Vote yes or no please:

Should I pad the numbers once again to avoid showing the world that John McCain is beating the shit out of Barack Obama?

Thanks my lefty friends... I knew I could count on your support"


Soon state polls will start coming out and we will need to see the truth. I don't want you to lose what little credibility you have left. You claim to do it right, so do it right.

sigmidusna said...

When I first heard of this site on CNN, I thought it would be an interesting, non-partisan look at polls and the campaigns.

I understand that the managers of the site are Obama supporters, but I thought they would remain impartial. Unfortunately, their bias and opinions are too strongly in favor of Obama and it shows. This is no longer a non-partisan site.

I am no longer visiting fivethirtyeight.com and will discourage my friends from doing the same.

OzJohnnie said...

dariencrow;

Ah, but a webvote is a crazy thing. I voted to help Obama on the last choice in order to increase the pain when he's stomped in November. If I get another chance I'll do the same.

How can you let something like that go to a vote? It pretty much undermines the entire premise of this site.

Oz.

Alex S. said...
This post has been removed by the author.
John W. said...
This post has been removed by the author.
John W. said...

RE: sigmidusna

Good riddance.

assmole said...

sigmidusna, that's such sad news.

(what a wanker!)

Alex S. said...

The Obama campaign just needs to tell what´s at stake. If McCain/Palin wins the next election there will be a so-called conservative majority in the Supreme Court for the next 20-30 years. That means women lose the right to choose. That means no equal rights for gay people.
It could also mean the end of affirmative action which will cement the current distribution of wealth depending on the place of birth.
It also means that creationism becomes a politically accepted "theory". That´s good-bye to America´s scientific position on the world.
It also means that we have to live with a significant probability of going to war with Iran.
It also means that the deficit reaches new record heights. Get a Ross Perot chart or something. It will mean that more money ends up in the hands of wealthy people that simply have no more use for all that money, and money that is not circulating is money wasted for the economy. The Obama tax plan is the only plan that makes sense!
It could also mean, if you follow McCain´s voting record, that the next administration abolishes the minimum wage, thus creating a new class of extremely low-paid people receptive to the kind of aggressive populist campaign only the Republicans are able to pull off.
It also means that the Oil lobby retains their grip on american policy. Praying for Oil pipelines! Watch last year´s movie "There will be blood" to see the unholy alliance between the churches and the oil companies.
It also means that there will be 4 or 8 more years of a militaristic ideology in which military service is the key of getting ahead in your life.
In short, it means that the neo-conservative movement will complete their program they have been working on the past 20 years.

These are the issues that the Obama campaign can´t be vocal enough about - because these assumptions are based on reality!

OzJohnnie said...

alex s;

The Obama campaign just needs to tell what´s at stake. If McCain/Palin wins the next election there will be a so-called conservative majority for the next 20-30 years.

Much to you unfathomable horror, I'm sure, that may actually be an electoral loser for Obama.

Oz.

Blame said...

There is one situation where Obama will wisely ignore Palin - If he knows that a big scandle is about to break.

Then it is best to watch from the sidelines while the press does the job for free. This is especialy true if the scandle is about values.

Right now I would imagine that there about 10 competing camera crews trying to be the first to create & air a video biography of Palin's life.

Peterbilt said...

Fannie and Freddie just collapsed. People are losing their homes and their shirts. Direct result of the Bush administration flushing banking regulations down the toilet, with John "Keating 5" McCain's help. Direct historical parallel with the Great Depression.

Our enemies (Iran) in the Middle East have more influence, and our allies less, as a direct result of W. Bush's ham-handed, idiotic war & foreign policy.

Russia is beginning to flex its muscles, and we've got no leverage, because we're already overextended in a quagmire. No administration in recent memory has presided over such a drastic crumbling of American lives and America's place in the world. McCain would continue doing what has hurt us where we live, tarnished our image, and reduced our influence in the world. Barack Obama would carry on the kind of governance that Bill Clinton practiced when he handed off the country to the Republicans in MUCH better shape than he found it.

That's your story. Tell it. Over and over. And over.

Alex S. said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Alex S. said...

@ OzJohnnie:

A real conservative majority, yes, but not one that favores torture and expands the federal grip across womens´ bodies.

Juris said...

It would be easy to run counter-ads to your second set, Nate. In fact, Obama may have waited too long to run his. The counter ads are going to be ordinary folks from Alaska who sing the praises of Sarah -- how she's broken the oil barons, how she's giving money back to every citizen, how she's supporting education, how she's shown "people values."

John said...

I had the same thought when I watched those short personal stories at the convention. I was thinking - heavy rotation on low cost cable channels.

MichaelR said...

Alaskans pay no income tax or property tax. They get a check every year for their share of oil revenue.

Why do they need federal money? Why aren't they paying for their own projects?

Take away the annual check and implement the tax level the rest of us pay. Until then have the federal funds go to projects for people who are pitching in to pay for their projects.

FreeThinker said...

I've only seen the "Don't Know Much.." video on the internet, but it is priceless and on point and fun to watch. It works for me.

But, how do we take an entertaining and light hearted look at the terribly destructive things that have happened under Bush-Cheney and tag McCain as the new Godfather?

Forget Palin. She's a diversion, an attractive nuisance, James Dobson's first choice, no need to vet.

McCain's credibility as the leader of the free world needs to be questioned with entertaining humor that is clearly on point and touches people where they live. Themes: Whose America is it, Americans or multi-national corporations and foriegn governments? Where in the world is your husband, son, daughter, mother, father (when habeus corpus is suspended)? What is the meaning of laws that are discretionary for the president. Is the Bill of Rights for individual Americans or does it extend to Global Corporations, as the supreme court seems to say? Or, stated differently, "Has the Supreme Court, the final arbiter of justice in America, coopted the rights of individuals in dispute with corporate interests?" Hmm, sounds like an actual debating issue.

These are serious matters which touch at the very meaning of America and therefore at peoples gut. They are also central to Obama's call for change, (I hope). The Dems should push the Reps on the real gut issues that they are running away and hiding from.

The Reps do not want these themes to be brought up because of their criminal involvement in destroying constitutional rights. So, they pander to the robotic, righteous right (RRR).

Bush and Cheney were mostly cynical in this, making promises they never intended to follow through on. They wanted Bush to realize his (childish) American dream of being a war president so they sold out their base as well as the American people to Bush's "vision" of himself. BTW, having been sold out twice by B-C, shouldn't the RRR have learned a lesson here about trusting the Reps? Maybe so. This time they'll do it themselves.

But McCain, Mr. Hyde by some accounts, or maybe Mr. Hide, since he's "mad" at the media now, with Palin at his back, is a dreary prospect.

I'm sure Mr. Dobson would like nothing more than another weak president controlled by an ideolog like Ms. Palin, who in turn looks to fundamentalists like him for advice and counsel. Watch your back, John!

FreeThinker said...

An earlier post had it right. The national polls don't translate necessarily into electoral votes. Palin has excited the supressed white guys who would likely vote Red anyway. That would shift the national numbers but not the EV count. Nate's model, not adjusting for events of this type, wouldn't pick it up. Hey, maybe some dummy variables to model one-off events...

And speaking of Red, since he's using ferderal funds that we don't have, is McCain's campaign, being financed by the Chinese?

How ironic.

Gary said...

I agree that the Achiles heel in Obama campaign is the ads. The ads are wither defensive or issue based. It seems like they dont really have a professional war room. Currently, all they do is do a swift response (no pun intended) to a McCain ad. That is not good enough. They need to hire the Clinton War Machine.

McCain ads are quite smart and targetted. They aren't quite negative ads, in so much as being just "anti-positive".

So, I think its do or die for Obama now. They need to unleash a set of real solid ads. Here are some themes:

1> Tie McCain to Bush: Jon Stewart had a segment last Friday, where they had a clip of the convention address by Bush in 2000 and McCain in 2008, side by side. They were eerily identical. That would be a great ad.

2> Attack McCain's temperament: Get some testimonials. Depict the pick of Sarah Palin as not a Maverick decision, but just another example of a risky choice based on gut. Point: McCain-Palin is more risky!

3> Attack McCain's age (in a anti-positive way): Show that he is "loosing it". The Shia/Sunni mix up, the Checkoslovakia mix up etc ...

4> Attack his lack of Economic prowess: In an interview early summer, McCain flippantly told George Stepahnopolis, that he can "find 100 billion dollars" in the budget anyday and use it to pay for the tax cuts and Iraq war. Use that and others to show his complete lack of understanding of the economy.

DONT BE SHY!
and DON'T ATTACK SARAH PALIN ... that is just a conscious distraction designed by the McCain Campaign.... ALWAYS ATTACK THE TOP OF THE TICKET ...

Darío said...

Democratic Party:

Sweep the left from the party.

Virginia Conservative said...

Twelve point Surge for McCain! The Surge is working =)

So when is Biden dumped and replaced with Hillary?

FreeThinker said...

Here's a link to an excellent OpEd by Leonard Pitts on Mitt Romney's prattling:
http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/leonard-pitts/story/674011.html

El Cid said...

Man. Things do move fast these days. The Democratic Convention was a little over a week ago, and we're treating it like a year ago, and the Republican Convention was a few days ago, and now it's like months old news.

Good grief. If this acceleration picks up it'll be like that Bizarro cartoon about how "that's so 5 minutes ago..."

Virginia Conservative said...

So I guess you guys are going to dump Biden soon and replace him with Hillary? It might be your only shot!

Justin said...

I disagree that the Obama campaign is on the defensive. Everything I've seen from his campaign since the GOP convention has been consistent. Obama addressed the convention, said McCain's "we're all Americans" comment was hollow and meaningless in light of the bloodbath he orchestrated, said (correctly) that "running on personalities" was not what matters. McCain is trying to win the White House with no plan, just five years as a POW and plenty of false attacks. They're trying to suck Obama into a personality battle, and he's not falling for it. I agree a couple of negative ads would be useful, but I wouldn't focus on Palin; as most people have said, she's insanely popular in Alaska because she writes them all big checks every year and the attacks would be too easy to counter. Plus that would be sexist.

All of the GOP frenzy will end soon...as has been said over and over, news cycles are really short nowadays. What happened last Wed. and Thurs. already feels like an eternity ago. Most undecided voters may be swinging back and forth but will ultimately judge on the debates. As of right now, I'd handicap Obama to have a huge edge there, as he has an actual plan and McCain can't tell outright lies about how he doesn't want to produce energy or is going to raise everyone's taxes, and Obama's a better orator.

Also, like everyone, I'm ready to see the state polls. I have no faith in the national tracking polls to accurately represent how the electoral college will break down. I don't think anyone would think the popular vote would be decided by a margin of more than 2% or so.

Darío said...

It´s over. No time for Hillary now.
The Obama ego would cost him the election.
Center-right people needs the dems for win the White House.

Geoff said...

The speed of the campaign is building on itself El Cid, i'd agree time seems relative. We're all too plugged in, however, to the low information voter things are probably little different from 2000/2004.

I know the money on Intrade is swinging hard to Cainer, as predicted by yours truly. Now 52 OBama//47 McCain.

We'll be at 50/50 by the 9.11 forum, which now stands as the next big event to change the news cycle.

p.s. CNN attacking Palin's religion, Dems better be careful, watch what you wish for - Reverend Meeks is still out there, and Pfleger and Wright can always be recycled.

I am a Fractal said...

Here's a list of books Sarah Palin wanted to see banned. Let’s show Sarah and the rest of her Republican friends that this is America, not Nazi Germany.

Check to see if your library has all of these books today! Read them if you haven’t, or get your library to get them so others can.

A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess
A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle
Annie on My Mind by Nancy Garden
As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
Blubber by Judy Blume
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
Canterbury Tales by Chaucer
Carrie by Stephen King
Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
Christine by Stephen King

Confessions by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Cujo by Stephen King
Curses, Hexes, and Spells by Daniel Cohen
Daddy's Roommate by Michael Willhoite
Day No Pigs Would Die by Robert Peck
Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller
Decameron by Boccaccio
East of Eden by John Steinbeck
Fallen Angels by Walter Myers
Fanny Hill (Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure) by J ohn Cleland
Flow ers For Algernon by Daniel Keyes
Forever by Judy Blume
Grendel by John Champlin Gardner
Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone by J.K. Rowling
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets by J.K. Rowling
Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban by J.K. Rowling
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling
Have to Go by Robert Munsch
Heather Has Two& nbsp;Mommies by Leslea Newman
How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
Impressions edited by Jack Booth
In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak
It's Okay if You Don't Love Me by Norma Klein
James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl
Lady Chatterley's Lover by D.H. Lawrence
Leaves of Grass by Walt W hitman
Little Red Riding Hood by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
Lord of the Flies by William Golding
Love is One of the Choices by Norma Klein
Lysistrata by Aristophane s
More Scary Stories in the Dark by Alvin Schwartz
My Brother Sam Is Dead by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier
My House by Nikki Giovanni
My Friend Flicka by Mary O'Hara
Night Chills by Dean Koontz

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
On My Honor by Marion Dane Bauer
One Day in The Life of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey
One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
Ordinary People by Judith Guest
Our Bodies, Ourselves by Boston Women's Health Collective
Prince of Tides by Pat Conroy
Revolting Rhymes by Roald Dahl

Scary Stories 3: More Tales to Chill Your Bones by Alvin Schwartz
Scary Stories in the Dark by Alvin Schwartz
Separate Peace by John Knowles
Silas Marner by George Eliot
Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs

Darío said...

The RCP average is McCain up by 1.
Thanks leftist for destroyed one of the most important party of this Country.

MATT J. H. said...

Nate, thank you for bringing this up. The Obama campaign has been completely outclassed since Schmidt took over the McCain campaign in late June. You can see the polls start to move on the super tracker at that time. Obama's commercials have been lame for the most part, he has had NO message, and he's just flailing at McCain on the stump the last few days.

Obama took the entire summer off (Except the oversees trip), got hammered, lost all momentum, then never picked the obvious VP Hillary Clinton, gave McCain a huge opening and McCain drove a bus through it with Palin. This has been a terrible campaign, and to be honest, even though McCain has no ideas, he's run the better campaign.

President McCain is looking more and more likely with every passing day.

Geoff said...

Fractal:

Can you source your claims other than Dem talking points? The librarian and others have debunked this claim of substantial book banning. This list you post is just a wish list of certain holy roller types.

Geoff said...

Only a one point lead for Cainer on Rasmussen in solid and leaners - great sign for Obama.

RAs. makes a good point thou - he's weighing by party id and the GOP convention apparently caused a significant shift in party ID which their numbers do NOT account for and wont until October 1 at earliest when they next shift the weighting

Karen Desmond said...

Fractal:
If you have a source for this list please post.

p smith said...

Dems, hold your fucking nerve for once. This is a post convention bounce that will disappear as with all other bounces. Last week Obama led by 6-9 points. That wasn't real either.

The sad reality is that there is a large portion of the electorate that votes on the basis of what they last saw on TV. The whole Palin thing has given the Retards an extra few days of coverage but eventually this will return into just another presidential race.

I expect to see McCain's bounce peak today (up 3 in Rasmussen and up 4 in Gallup) before returning to even by next weekend.

Nate's bounce predictor graph has actually turned out to be pretty prescient thus far.

Virginia Conservative said...

Hey Smith-

I thought the convention bounce shows "potential"? Looks like McCain has more "potential" than Obama since the bounce was bigger huh P Smith?

Geoff said...

Nearly 50/50 on Intrade. Money is talking, and its talking McCain surge.

MATT J. H. said...

There are so many creative ads the Obama campaign could use but Obama is a professor and likes to play fair. Well, McCain has been playing unfair, and winning. McCain made a very risky choice in palin, theat has worked very well thus far. McCain is now running on change, which is really funny, but voters are buying it so what the hell.

One thing Obama has been since winning the Primary is conventional. Changed his FISA vote, moved to the center, let McCain beat his brains out all summer and never fought back. Never picked the VP with the most to offer, Hillary. Never made up with the Hillary crowd. Never defined himself or McCain.

Now McCain is running on fixing Washington and Obama is the Washington candidate. LOL. If a presidential campaign lets the obvious change candidate lose the change mantle to the quasi incumbent in a change year, then he deserves to lose.

Good job Obama. Another democrat throwing an un-losable election. The funny thing is, it may even be a landslide. Imagine losing a landslide after the last eight years. It is unbelievable how incompetent the Obama camp has been. Even a loyal democrat has to give props to McCain, he's done what he needed to to win. Thats what the republicans do, they win. It appears the democrats do need the Clinton's to win for them. I'll go get some Hillary 2012 buttons.

Rhonda said...

I've not seen many Obama ads. Only McCain ads. That worries me. Good point Nate.

Virginia Conservative said...

Sorry Matt, this is still a Republican center-right country.

Karen Desmond said...

I think the idea of having the "regular" folk on the ads is terrific. They were just great. Especially Pam and Barney Smith.

Other ideas - if they could come up with a graphic for "Your share of the American Pie" - with two pies, and then somehow visually show how only 1% of the population pie-share has grown over the last eight years, interspersed with graphs of wages flatlining over last eight years, cost of milk and gas skyrocketing, jobs dropping, and corporate profits and top 1% of populations going through the roof.

The bigger pie share should be tagged with the by-line "John McCain More of the Same" and the smaller pie share should be tagged with
"John McCain - Country First?"
and have bullet points
- Votes against equal pay
- Votes for sending American jobs overseas
- Votes for Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich

And seriously - can't the Obama team hire Jed from JedReport, or any of the other talented blog youtube makers out there, or steal staff from The Daily Show, for god's sake. There must be so many great filmmakers out there who would be dying to make ads for Obama. That clip of McCain/Bush from the coverage of the last night of the Republican convention was so on target:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184111&title=john-mccains-big-acceptance
(starting at about 4m50s of this clip)
Or the reformed maverick:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184113&title=john-mccain-reformed-maverick

They need an ad that everyone will be talking about and they haven't had a single one so far.

Virginia Conservative said...

Is there any major party in the world more totally incompetent and inept at national campaigning than the Democrat Party?

azacofalltrades said...

Ad pointing out McCains Health/Age
followed by

Its 3am
Russia is making a move against the US.
Will they stand down because the VP was a 2nd year governor of the state closest to them?

pksundevil said...

Fractal,

That list has been debunked for reasons, among many others, that some of those books were published AFTER she made the inquiry about having books pulled. That's just the standard banned-books list. Unless, of course, you believe that in 1996 she knew the titles of Harry Potter books to be published from 1998 and onwards.

Bill P. said...

VC:

I don't know, since there's no such thing as a "Democrat Party". There is a DEMOCRATIC Party, but I don't know if that's the one you mean.

My counter question would be:

"Is there any major party in the world more totally incompetent and inept at governing and unifying America than the Republican Party?"

jme0909 said...

I think they do need to go more negative on McCain's flip flops and hypocrisy. They need to act quickly to undercut his new campaign theme - that he's the real reformer who will be much different than Bush. Because if that starts to stick in people's heads, then Obama is in trouble. Like Nate posted an endorsement by Colin Powell would help. Powell could make the case that he knows Bush and McCain well and they are going to be the same.

Contrast what he says on talk shows to how he actually votes....that's he gets to have it both ways.

Save all the micro-issue talk for the debates. Hit him hard on his character - for not standing up to the Bush agenda the last 6 years. "The call came for McCain to do the right thing and he chose his party over his country. Why would the next 4 years be different?"

Hit him hard for reversing his stance on offshore drilling a week after he took in a huge donation from Hess.

There are so many ways to hit him on this....just start picking some and running the ads.

Virginia Conservative said...

Bill P.-

Why don't you try winning a campaign, and then maybe you'll get a chance to govern someday.

You nominated a loony leftist. All you needed was a single, and you swung for the fences. McCain is going to win in a walk now. People had their mind made up all along--and are now admitting it. They like McCain and will vote for him.

Virginia Conservative said...

The best part is Joe Biden. He will make such a great loser!

evolvex said...

Nate,

As someone who used to work as a television editor for several major networks in DC, I'd have to agree with your main point, but disagree with many of your other points.

1) I do agree he needs better adds. If he were to run more positive adds your second set of adds would be great.

2) I do not agree that he should run Palin adds yet -- I would wait and see if she drops out of the spot light after a few days. His best bet with her may be to try and shift the focus back to McCain.

3) Oabama needs to run hard hitting negative attack adds against McCain.

My reasons:

1) The Obama campaign finally strongly attacked McCain for the first time at the convention and you saw how high Obama's bounce was after the convention. People always say they don't like negative adds, but there is great data out there showing they are the most effective in moving voters.

2) Obama has already spent a lot of time up until now informing people of his story and his plan for America. He did a great job of painting his own image as the 'Change' candidate. That is done and it will be very difficult for anyone to tear that down in the next two months with a majority of voters.

I'm not saying 100% of the adds need to be negative. I however would say that at least 50% should be.

Ames said...

I couldn't agree with you more; they definitely need better ads. I actually wrote one and put it up on YouTube; tell me what you think: here. I think the strategy of attacking his judgment, his greatest strength, head on is wise. Attacking Palin indirectly by using her as a conduit to get to McCain avoids the potential nastiness of attacking her head on, while still making great use of her.

azacofalltrades said...

While we are at it how about an ad pointing out that the McCain campaign can't tell the difference between Walter Reed Medical Center and Middle School? The fact that they had an ad pointing out that Obama is a "celebrity" like Paris Hilton, but then reap the benefits of Palin who is MORESO. Ugh Wake up America!!!

MATT J. H. said...

Virginia Conservative said...
Is there any major party in the world more totally incompetent and inept at national campaigning than the Democrat Party?


Aint that the truth. Even Republicans must wonder as to the democrats incompetence. Now, I know this race is far from over, but its been going down hill since June. Just look at the super tracker.

It seems the republicans have professional campaign staff who are experienced seasoned veterans at Presidential politics while the democrats have staff used to congressional and senate races but have no idea about Presidential politics. Almost all McCain's staff are GOP operatives who have done this before. Schmidt's goal is to win every news cycle and dominate news coverage and he's doing it very well. Meanwhile the Obama campaign seems indifferent to media spin and winning news cycles.

McCain has been bolder, taking more risks, and he has given himself an excellent chance at winning when he has no business doing so. I hope the democratic party will change its ways if they lose this election and move to a more center left position with experienced Presidential staff who know what they are doing.

Darío said...

Matt, the left is the dems problem.
The Party will return to the party of the middle-class center-right party.

MATT J. H. said...

AMES,

Your as is better than almost all of Obama's. well done.

Juris said...

Quite a few people have argued that the choice of Palin was a very risky and impulsive move by McCain.

The problem with this criticism is that a lot of people may concede that McCain bet the farm on this lottery ticket of a running mate, he may have hit the jackpot. And while a lottery winner can be envied, he can't be criticized for winning. Instead he earns credit for having such good intuition.

As Nate says in his column today on Obama's ads, Obama and the opposition need to run against that image that she's a winning ticket. She favored the Bridge to Nowhere, she got massive earmarked pork for her little town, she got massive earmarked pork for Alaska. She put her town into debt and created huge and expensive legal problems that according to the Wall Street Journal are still there. She doesn't know what the vice president does. Is she going to learn on the job?

PeteKent said...

Tom Mosloom of the M Network, a branding company and a regular on POTUS, thinks the Obama ads have sucked. Basically he faults them for lack of coherent message and praises McCain for the consistency of his ad approach which continues today.

It seems now the McCain campaign is going full bore on the issue of Change using Palin as the wedge.

Obama talks about change, but has never accomplished anything that would amount to real change and is basically a go-along, party hack. That is the message coming out of the McCain campaign.

Maybe Obama needs to change his VP and put HRC on the ticket before his candidacy becomes even more apparently doomed than it is today.

Tarik said...

Nate's right about everything in this post... except for the banjo music! (Obama can't risk the appearance that some of the mockery is aimed at the politics of corrupt "provincials" i.e. rednecks qua rednecks.)

Navin said...

Have you seen this site: http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/

The site lets people enter their income, their marital status, and number of kids. It then spits out an estimate of how much more of a tax cut they would get with Barack's tax plan than with McCain's.

Could the campaign come up with their own calculator website (or have it on the main site, or link to it), and put it up on ads and mention it during speeches. This way, voters can see for themselves how much Obama is better for their pocketbook than McCain.

They could even have people enter their state, and the calculator spit out the estimate not only in dollars, but in the how many tanks of gas (adjusted by the Lundberg survey for that day and state) worth the difference would be. Or how many Big Macs. Or something like that.

jp said...

They should do an ad using the 'agents of intolerance' quote from mccain in 2000.

Start with it, then show quotes from papers about his pandering to the religious right. End by questioning his judgment and his 'maverick' image.

This will:

a) define Palin (out on the right)
b) tap into evangelicals doubts about Mccain.
c) start to neutralize his 'maverick' image.

I agree, they need to hit him harder.

Navin said...

John McCain's manhood should be questioned.
How will John McCain be able to bring change to Washington when, as the GOP nominee, he was not permitted to even pick his own running mate? It is widely reported that he wanted Joe Lieberman, pro-choice, pro-Iraq war former Democrat from Connecticut, or Tom Ridge, the pro-choice former governor of PA and former DHS secretary. However, the fundamentalist wing of the Republican party would not allow either of those pro-choice options. Hence the choice of Sarah Palin, a governor with deep connections to the culture of lobbyists in Alaska. For instance, the lobbyist she hired when she was mayor of Wasilla, pop 7000 at the time, was an associate of convicted GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. And, as governor, she was for the "bridge to nowhere" before she was against it.
Is it really credible that, had John McCain been able to act on his own free will, to be his own man, that he, the self-styled scourge of pork, would pick a Jack Abramoff client? Right now, John McCain is not is own man .... he is the unwilling puppet of the fundamentalist wing of the GOP, and their representative, Sarah Palin. The question is, if he becomes President, how will he be able to run things when his VP is more popular with his own party than he is? He will be a lame duck even before inauguration.
A presidential candidate has his or her highest level of power at the convention. And yet, John McCain, at the height of his power, had to bow down and accept a VP nominee not of his choosing. 

FreeThinker said...

I've noticed myself talking back to the TV on every McCain ad. Every negative they bring up and name Obama seems to be an indictment of the Republicans who own the White House, the Supreme Court and control what Congress can move on. The Republicans are advertising their own shortcomings in office. They feature Obama in dark tones more than they feature McCain.

How about a parody interlaced with actual accoutability traced to the B-C Admin. A series of shorts turning dark into light, issue by issue, not name calling, just facts.

I can find no reason to place any trust whatsoever in another Rep admin, especially when they've said they want more of the same, only this time for real for the "Pro-life except after birth" crowd.

Matthew H said...
This post has been removed by the author.
BeanoCook said...

Turns out the email going around with lies about Obama's tax plan really shook her. She is a retiree and all of her savings are in stocks. She is obsessed with capital gains, taxes on dividends and the inheritance tax.

"But mom! You won't see ANY changes if you make under $250,000 a year under the Obama plan! Do you make $250,000 a year??"

She laughed. "Not on your life. Can you send me some sources for that info?"

So I did. Now she is back on Team Obama.
---------------------------------------
WRONG On CAPITAL GAINS--

Obama will increase taxes (end Bush's tax cuts) for those making over $200,000-250,000.

Obama will increase capital gains taxes on everyone. In fact, he will close to double this tax.

Matthew H said...

p smith said...
Dems, hold your fucking nerve for once. This is a post convention bounce that will disappear as with all other bounces. Last week Obama led by 6-9 points. That wasn't real either.


Obama's ads have always sucked. Obama's plan has been high road combined with personal contact. The current bounce shows that won't be enough.

This isn't even swinging for a home run- this is swinging for a home run using one arm. If Obama has been holding back re: ads, it's time for him to stop.

One good ad, one that shows how you'll pay more taxes with McCain, will do the trick. How he wants to tax medical benefits, for example. There used to be a Menard's commercial that ended with some people singing "Save more money at Menard's". The same jingle with "Pay More Taxes With McCain" would work.

These numbers don't indicate panic. They indicate a close race, which until recently Plouffe et al didn't seem to think was happening. They've can't afford to screw around anymore.

colt said...

So what they say is true; 538 has unabashedly become a PRO Obama web site no longer interested in fair & accurate results.

Stephen said...

I agree that he needs some better ads. What I'd like to see are some ads with Obama speaking directly to the camera. I think this is powerful when done right, and could help in myriad ways here.

colt said...

Caught Joe Biden on MTP on Sunday. Joe belives the reason we are winning in Iraq now is because we are doing what he told everybody to do over two years ago.

Ya gotta love Joe Biden; there is nothing he has not or will not claim credit for!

Did you know Joe Biden believes life begins at conception? How does he reconcile that with Obama's refusal to say when life begins?

zozie said...

Props to Nate for supporting his beliefs publicly.

The comment by draNgNon and others about how this should be a neutral site. WHY??? Show me all the neutral, objective sites on the Web. Do you find the news channels objective? Is David Gregory more objective?

Democrats have to fight for what they believe in. They have to stand up for their guy. Don't read this site if you don't like it.

By the way, what I don't sense is 538 reporting the stats in such a way as to spin them weirdly. Some they like, some they don't, and some seem off the wall. But they are what they are and as such they can help us like a canary in a coal mine.

BeanoCook said...

On CAPITAL GAINS TAXES.

Well, it looks like I was wrong. Obama has changed his position at least 3 times on capital gains taxes. During the Democratic primary, he was for a massive increase in CAP GAINS TAX, now he says he may delay this tax, or not do it at all.

Considering how the left loves fairness and to increase taxes, I highly doubt we can trust him on this issue, to keep away from increasing CAP GAINS.

Here is a decent summary of Obama's "Change" or flip flop on this issue.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/8/18/obamas-curious-capital-gains-tax-epiphany.html

Cee said...

Obama's ads must be much more meat-filled. Use EVERYONE's idea of the speech's same words... Like its plagiarism.

The kid's gloves are off...

The difference in the politics should never be who's nicer, but who's telling the truth. Make absolute hay at ANY gaffe or fumble by McCain. Spend tons on ads, some 5 - 30 seconds spots which go through sports games to have 2:30 minutes to hammer home facts, and the follies of the opponent.

Use ALL existing funds to hammer home the message, buying out most if not all time slots when Republicans, right-leaning districts - even those that -10 for Obama. Blanket FOX News, spend much more on radio... Make Murdoch money, he's even said "Obama would sell more newspapers".

And the absolute must:
Get out before the gun issue immediately. Say to America, "I will not in any way shape or form ban guns. I will not stop law-abiding citizens from purchasing, owning, and keeping a firearm. I will not seek impose ANY federal ban on ANY firearms. But I will propose a Common Sense Castle Doctrine in which a home owner may defend his domicile, premises, and their family's life by deadly force if necessary. All loopholes for any purchase of a firearm will be closed, but all legal, lawful ownership is protected by the 2nd Amendment, as stated by the Supreme Court."

Second absolute must:
"95% of America, everyone making less than $250K/yr. and couples making $500K/yr. will get a tax cut, will get tax breaks for college and medical care on top of every single break that available now. Not one single tax increase. [They] have told you different, I will tell now - "Not one single raise in your federal taxes, period." And this will be paid for a scaled-down Iraq posture, a scaled-up Afghanistan posture, and a tactical strike on the area between Afghani-Pakastan border where Bid Laden is hiding. Not one senior pays taxes if they have earned $50K/year or less - including SS payments."

And finally as important as Union workers are to the Democrats: "The days of rewarding companies who give your jobs to overseas workers are over. No handouts to any company outsourcing their labor force, incentives only for companies who hire American, and at least half of their labor force American will qualify - starting with companies $1 million or less to ensure that small businesses gets America moving again."

All of the above is NECESSARY to win. If Mr. Obama does not, then this election will go to the Republicans by default.

Being from the south, I have personally seen and tasted the soft bigotry of America and it will be the hardest hurdle to overcome for Mr. Obama and indeed the Democratic party. It will also not be a "mistake" made by many in the Democratic party for at least two decades.

If Mr. Obama wins by sheer electoral vote numbers from the Democratic coastal bases, CO, NM, or especially if he gains OH (maybe?), VA, or (i'll faint!) FL, then it will have been the voter registrations that got the win. And he would go a long way to assuage FUD against him, if he would make the three points listed here.

It would be a colossal mistake to believe "substance" will triumph over style - especially with so much riding on "Change" and "Direction". Lets try Clarity and Directness. America would be inclined to hear some "Straight Talk" from a Democrat and might be shocked at how different, for better or worse, the straight talk comes out.

monkey said...

I'm no messaging expert but I don't understand why we're not hearing some variant of the following on every sunday talk show, every interview, every public speech (I'm getting most of this from ThinkProgress' Palin digest at http://thinkprogress.org/palin-digest/) -- far from changing up the race, the addition of Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket just confirms that McCain intends to continue the failed policies of George W. Bush. The similarities between Bush and Palin are striking -- Bush champions drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, so does Palin. George Bush thinks he's on a mission from God in the Iraq war, Palin believes the war is a "Task from God". George Bush doesn't think global warming is caused by Man, neither does Sarah Palin. George Bush has consistently pushed for abstinence-only education programs, just like Sarah Palin. After his term is over, George Bush will have left the country with hundreds of billions of
dollars more debt than we had when he was elected. When her term as mayor of Wasilla was over, Sarah Palin had left her previously debt-free town of 6000 with $20 million in debt. Bush's speechwriter even wrote Palin's RNC address. America can't afford four more years of Bush and Palin's failed policies.

There's plenty more examples, but that gives the basic idea. I can see a commercial that's just clips from Palin's public speeches matched with similar comments from W. The McCain campaign has taken an incredible gamble with Palin, and they're out there working as hard as they can to make it pay off. But the flip side of that gamble, if Obama will get on it, is that they've given us a big opportunity to tie Bush's failures even more squarely around McCain's neck. But the window of opportunity is closing

Charles M. Kozierok said...

Geez. What a bunch of hysteria.

Don't Panic - 10 Reasons Why Obama Supporters Should Chill.

Send it to all your panicky liberal friends. :)

Jackie said...

I can't for the life of me figure out why they don't just rip off McCain's own "celebrity" ad and replace the footage of Obama with the footage of Palin. Points out the hypocrisy of the selection, points out her lack of qualifications, and it's a nice little jab in line with the ones she pulled out in the convention.

Steve said...

You propose that the Obama campaign duplicate the strategy used at the convention in their commercials by having ordinary citizens talking about why they feel that "eight is enough". I hope someone from the Obama campaign reads (and heeds) your blog, because it is a perfect idea. It completely negates the Republican strategy of trying to make the campaign all about Obama, and makes the election about *all of us*.

Jeff said...

The Dems should use the pit bull as a symbol but use it to move back to a discussion of the economy and other important issues. Such as:

"Sarah Palin talks about being a pit bull. But we've had 8 years of this already. And in those 8 years unemployment is now at its highest, [add other stats]. It's time to focus on other things. In the last 8 years a Republican pit bull has moved this country in the wrong direction. McCain and Palin are only offering us more of the same."

Gary said...

Obama is running a wimpy cumbiya campain.
They are wasting money on feel good ads.
I go through the roof every time Obama says Mccain is a good man. Mccain is another Bush, only worse.

I have thrown away $550 on donations to Obama and the Democrates (I was a Republican for 47 years and voted for the devil "Bush" twice)

Obama will not get another dime from me until I see ads that tell the truth and blast the Republicans for ruining the USA, the world and our childrens future.

jdk said...

Perhaps the campaign should be reading "Made to Stick".

Billy Jack said...

15 SECOND COMMERCIAL:
(ominous deep music)
-(5 seconds) Grainy black and white footage of Katrina victims floating dead in New Orleans.
-(5 seconds) Grainy black and white footage of Terry Schiavo.
-(2.5 seconds) Grainy black and white footage of gas prices over $4.
-(2.5 seconds) Grainy photo of GW Bush's face and Iraq.
For the entire time, plastered over these images in giant font, spell out "DON'T VOTE REPUBLICAN".
-End commercial.

Oz said...

Obama has two problems.

#1) America is a center right country and Obama is a lefty. Bill Clinton won becuase he was able to grab a chunk of the Center.

#2) Obama has gotten tangled up in trying to prove that he has more experience than PALIN and the fact that he has to even make that argument shows why McCain is nutmeggng the Obama campaign so well right now.

In truth I think this campaign is going to go McCain's way until and unless either McCain or Palin choke in a debate.

And frankly, since I'm a Republican, I'm okay with that.

Matt said...

Maybe what Obama needs is another kind of "One America" speech. When I watched Palin's speech at the convention I was really put off by the vitriol and the pitting of "small town folk" against "cultural elite" (read: urban, educated, etc). I thought a lot of moderate voters would be put off by the divisiveness of it, but it got so little play compared to the media hyping her "narrative".

Obama needs to appeal to those moderate voters again by appealling to the message of "One America", breaking the past eight years of divisiveness and culture war crap. I'm guessing there are moderate suburban women who would like to hear that, rather than be lectured about the superiority of "small town values" over their "elitist" ways.

Eric said...

I did some extensive analysis from the best data I can come up with, including new voter registration, results in popular vote state by state in 2000 and 2004, 2008 primaries, and best guess as to how the demographics will be effected by different things, here's the bottomline:

Obama's best bet to win is almost certainly flip Nevada and hold onto New Hampshire (along with Kerry states +Iowa and New Mexico). I think holdingo onto New Hampshire might be more difficult than flipping Nevada. Both states were virtual ties in 2004. Democratic registration is way up in Nevada and Palin is unlikely to have a big positive effect there. New Hampshire might have enough of a "Bradley Effect" to shift the state by 1 or 2 points which would likely be enough to flip it. Other potential tipping points for Obama in a close election include Colorado, Florida, Virginia, and Ohio. All seem to be less likely based off of historic data, current data, and demographics than the Nevada/New Hampshire combo. I'm sure Obama would love to flip Florida and McCain would love to flip Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin, but if the elction ends up close in the popular vote, nono of those 4 seem as likely as the scenario where it comes down to Obama needing Nevada/New Hampshire. Just my best guess, but I'm pretty good with statistical analysis.

jme0909 said...

Nate and other polling analysts,

I'd love to hear an explanation as to why so many people (seemingly 10-15% of those polled) can change their minds week to week. Daily tracking polls showed Obama up 9 after his tour of Europe and the Middle East and then 3 or 4 days later it was 1 point.

In the last 2 weeks Obama went from -2 to +8 to -4. Are that many people swayed so easily by the last thing they see or hear? Follow the shiny object!

If that is the case then the Obama campaign should start running ads attacking McCain's positions to show he wouldn't be a reformer like he claims. And then also have a big rollout of another announcement every week. Maybe tell people that Colin Powell or Anthony Zinni will serve in your cabinet next week....something that grabs headlines.

If Obama can tip his hand over who some of his cabinet picks will be, he may win over some undecided voters who just aren't sure about his experience. You might feel more secure voting for Obama, if you had doubts, if were undecided and you know some former Clinton cabinet members will be in there along with some moderate Republicans.

I was at a party over the weekend and all of the people who said they were undecided seemed to be leaning Obama....they just want a little more reassurance that would govern similarly to Clinton and that would be acceptable.

sinz52 said...

If you want to go after Sarah Palin, you have to get your blogosphere buddies to stop crying wolf about Sarah's family.

Their incessant attempts to spread salacious dirt on Sarah's daughters, her baby, her pregnancies, etc., all over the Internet, are just generating sympathy for her from the public. (Every mom in America is shivering at the thought of being targeted by the blogosphere like that.)

Had you focused on Sarah's professional record as mayor and governor in Alaska all this time, you would have had some success and you might still do so. But the soap-opera noise being generated about Sarah's family is drowning it out. The blogosphere seems obsessed with trying to find some "smoking gun" in her personal life. That's turning out to be a losing tactic.

New Mexico Matt said...

Time to go nuclear. Show clips of McCain's impulsive temperment and overreaction to foreign events with Bush's lead up to the Iraq War. The "he voted with Bush 90% or the time" is good, but doesn't impact on the gut level like comparing their rash and cynical decision making would.

sinz52 said...

Some of the polls are also showing that Obama is once again losing the national security argument to McCain, after having drawn roughly even with McCain earlier in the year.

Russia's invasion of Georgia and Sarah Palin the gunslinging mom are making an impression on the public that Obama isn't matching.

Despite Sarah Palin's lack of foreign-policy experience, the public senses that a frontier woman who has the guts to take a gun into the snow to hunt and kill and butcher animals to feed her family, also would have the guts to order the U.S. Air Force into military action, if she ever had to. She doesn't shrink from the shedding of blood, in other words.

Even if it sticks in his craw, Obama must either give a "drop the hammer" speech or put out some "drop the hammer" ads. Those are the ones that say flat out that any nation or terrorist group that attacks America and kills our people is going to pay dearly for it. His more left-wing supporters aren't going to like it. But they shouldn't be helping to set America's foreign policy anyway.

Not "bring them to justice," but "make them pay dearly." There's a difference. The latter is retributive.

shaun said...

It's 3:00 am. The phone rings. "The president has had a heart attack and is unconscious. Effective immediately, you are the acting president of the United States...and oh yeah, the Chinese are mobilizing forces to invade Taiwan." Who would you want to answer that phone call? Joe Biden or Sarah Palin?

Too bad no one will run this ad because it will remind everyone of why they supported Hilary. But really, the case against Palin's readiness is much stronger than Obama's.

Pssst said...

The Obama campaign should hold a Make Your Own Ad Contest for their supporters over the next two weeks.

Obama has lots of artistic, creative, talented supporters, and I imagine they'd get hundreds of decent submissions, if not thousands.

It would help if they provided background video and music clips on the contest website for less-expert users to download and use in their submissions.

Obama's advertising people can then look over all the submissions, choose the very best ones, edit them, and put them on the air.

It would also be cool to have Obama saying "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message by one of our grassroots supporters."

I like the idea of ads originating with supporters instead of with the campaign itself, especially if the ads are negative. The campaign can say that they didn't create the negative ad... an ordinary American did.

sinz52 said...

Maybe Obama could make an ad out of Andrew Sullivan's demand: "When will Sarah Palin release a sample of her amniotic fluid for DNA paternity testing?"

Biden could make that an issue with Sarah in the debates too.

Eric said...

Best guess IMO:

Poll of Polls is around McCain 47 Obama 45. Head to head about McCain 51.2 Obama 48.8. Assuming no catalyst between now and 9/26, 25% of McCain's bounce evaporates, the other 75% sticks, we have a dead even race, but the state by state dynamics have changed slightly into McCain's favor:

Battlegrounds

Pre-Palin Post-Palin

Ohio O 50 M 50 O 49 M 51
Colorado O 51 M 49 O 49 M 51
Virginia O 51 M 49 O 48 M 52
Florida O 47 M 53 O 49 M 51
Iowa O 55 M 45 O 52 M 48
New Mexico O 52 M 48 O 52 M 48
Nevada O 51 N 49 O 51 M 49
New Hampshire O 52 M 48 O 50 M 50
Pennsylvania O 53 M 47 O 52 M 48
Michigan O 53 M 47 O 51 M 49
North Carolina O 47 M 53 O 47 M 53
Wisconsin O 54 M 46 O 51 M 49

Bottomline, I think the game has changed, Pre-Palin Obama needed to hold on to Kerry states, flip NM and Iowa and anyone of Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Ohio, Florida, or a North Dakota, Montana, Alaska combo. Very likely. Now, it's much more difficult. Probably went from 75% Obama to 50/50

GisselleGP said...

Hello,
I recently found these articles and wanted to ask what you think the impact of voter suppression will have on this year's election?

Ohio
http://www.truthout.org/article/nearly-600000-voters-subject-possible-caging-ohio

Virginia
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/stopping-students-from-voting/

PA Dem said...

Tagline for pork ad: "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still pork.

mike2cents said...

How about hiring the Mac and PC guys and changing them to Dem and Rep?

Eric said...

Anyone notice Intrade has Hillary clinton at 3.5% to win the Presidency. Dems to win 53%, Obama 50%. There are clearly a group of folks that think somehow Hillary will become President. That's truly bizarre. I could understand if she were running at 0.3% or something, but over 3.5%, crazy!

cher said...

I agree 100 percent with this Nate. Come on we can't just sit back and let this go. I have already seen Mc Cain's new ad and it is excellent and you can bet that the press will have it on all the talk shows tonight to discuss it but it is about him and Palin nad so well done. Where is the 3 AM ad of the Dem's? The celebrity ad? If we lose we will hear about that forever. I am certain that there are so many creative people around Obama and if we trust him to run our country we trust him to know how to reach the people with ad's that are effective. I am really amazed at the new Mc Cain one which is crisp, clear and to the point. He fought this, she fought that, etc. We could have had something better or about the same. This is absurd and I am deeply committed to this campaign but when I think back to where I was a year ago I simply wanted a Dem in the White House. Because that is what we need but now ? Come on. No one is more pro Obama than me but I don't like sitting around watching things fall apart and advertisement has been a huge failure throught the campaign even in the Primarys. We expect the campaign to be able to do all of this just as we expect a president to take care of the economy and what is happening in Georgia. It is time to strike out or just sit back and watch the momentum take us over while Sarah has her little 2 or 3 part interview up in Alaska. Packing her son off for duty, nursing the baby, cooking a mooseburger, all while juggling a blackberry. Help. We need David Ploufe or Axelrod to say okay okay I read Nate every day and I get it. Meanwhile for those who do not like the analysis and the comments why on earth read them ? I certainly don't dwell on any post that is not to my way of thinking. If Nate could spin the election into the winning column I am sure that he would be doing far greater things in his life than what he is currently doing. He has always been open but he is not naive. He knows what is going on now and we all enjoy him the rest of you should watch Gregory as I won't be I'll be hanging around here for the next post. And you have the media lock stock and barrel so you can go obsess about Oprah not having Sarah on her show and not worry about the bigger issues.

Jeremy said...

Spot on Nate.

The Obama ads SUCK!! They're boring, unimaginative and do him absolutely no favors. Just by the ads you'd think Obama is the crotchety old windbag and McCain the change agent.

The sad part is that I think they live in their own world in Chicago and have no idea of this sad reality. Kinda sucks that they're gambling this election away.

longroad said...

PeteyPowderBlue- You are so right!

If you look at what is avaible on the net for Obama to use to beat up Mccain with and you look at what he has been doing he has been running a horrible campaign.

Listen to McCain insult the American worker....

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/22/14023/1070/795/572803

i'm begging Obama to use this.

That would blow this race wide open

Can someone explain to me why he has not?

The Zug said...

THERE IS NO HONOR IN LYING

"Senator McCain likes to talk about honor.

But is it honorable to make up lies about your opponent?

McCain Quote 1.

A LIE. Barack Obama . . .

McCain Quote 2.

A LIE. Barack Obama . . .

There is no honor in lying, Senator McCain.

Don't the American people deserve better?

I'm Barack Obama, and I approved this message."

Not only is the truth, it gets his goat with the honor thing too.

James said...

Don't refer to it as "earmarks." Many people don't know what that is. Call it "Wasilla Welfare."

Make Palin out to be the Wasilla Welfare Queen.

Carey said...

In have to say that the key point of this article - that the Obama campaign is lackluster is dead-on.

In fact I would say that in its current state he is on track to lose.

One can list the numerous unfair advantages the Republicans have worked out for
themselves - decades of "working the ref" by denouncing "media bias"
so that the brazen lying at the Republican Convention goes unremarked in the timid
media, the GOP's disdain for voting rights that has made them happy to tamper
with ballot access in every jurisdiction they control, etc., etc., etc. - but all
of this is futile hand wringing.

The ONLY way to redress this is hit back hard with ads that hammer McCain at his
weaknesses - his questionable temperament and ludicrous gaffes, his preposterous
convention speech conversion to the necessity of unspecified "change",
and to call out Republican lies for what they are (though some care must be taken
here not to slip into a reactive posture).

Reportedly, Obama has raised three times the campaign chest as McCain, but the only
TV ads I have seen since the conventions have been McCain ads repeating his lies
about the Obama program.

It is possible that the ads simply aren't airing where I live (California) since
it is a safe state for Obama, but I haven't heard any press coverage about a
major Obama campaign push either.

Where is the media blitz that should have followed on the heel of the Republican
Convention?

It may be 57 days to the election, but there are not 57 days left to win the campaign
- very little real shift in attitude occurs in the last few weeks. The next week
or two is critical time when prevailing attitudes gel and then get locked in. One
of the most crucial tests of a candidate now is if the electorate perceives that
his campaign is strong and effective - a candidate with a tepid or seemingly weak
campaign always loses.

Obama needs to lock in an advantage, however slight, BEFORE the first presidential
debate on September 26. That is only 18 days from now!

pj.evans.gen said...

Try this one. It worked for me.

Alen said...

The Democrats also need to get a sense of humor about everything. I'm tired of their "we've got the truth on our side" approach to everything. It makes them seem like school marms. One of the reason for SP's popularity -- deserved or not -- was that she made the delegates LAUGH at her convention. So, what about this for an ad:

What's the difference between President Bush's policies and John McCain's? LIPSTICK!

Then show areas where they are identical, including the huge costs for maintaining this dumb invasion in Iraq. The message should then be that John McCain's lipstick is just a different shad of red from Bush's.

Have fun, Dems!

Bill said...

Completely black screen, only sound is a heart beat.

Palin's extreme positions/failed policies pasted up in white text, one-by one ("Couldn't manage teh budiget in Wasilla," "Took millions in federal money for Alaska, even while Alaska profited from iol revenues," "Opposes abortion even in cases of rape."

Heart beat stops. Red line alarm.

Final text: Palin -- Not ready for Wasilla; not ready for America.