Tuesday, January 5, 2016

Presidential candidates are getting their campaign ads ready for the first primaries

Voting in Iowa and New Hampshire is only a couple of weeks away. Watch some of the ads that opponents are throwing at each other in order to possibly get ahead in the wake of many opponents. What do you think of some of these ads? Do you think they will help some of these candidates get further in the poles or is it futile? Are any of the ads appealing to you in any ways? And how is it relative to what we have been learning lately about campaigning.?

14 comments:

  1. First of all, I just think these ads are annoying. In the months leading up to the general election in 2012, I remember never being able to turn on the tv sitting through at least one political ad every commercial break. However, they do get the candidates name out there. As we learned in class, this might be most useful for lesser known candidates because for the most part, people have already decided whether they're for or against the top candidates at this point. Also, I wish that these ads didn't have to be so ridiculous. They're all really mean to each other and it seems to me that ideally, people should vote for a candidate because they believe in his values, rather than the fact that they are afraid of the other candidate's policies. I know that this is not realistic at all, but I think it's an interesting reflection on who we are as a nation at this point in time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think a lot of these ads are silly. I was particularly entertained about the notion that Ted Cruz can read the nation a fantastic bed-time story. I personally believe that attack ads like that are much less effective (at least on me) than ads with substantive ideas and issues. Therefore, I think Trump's advertisements are going to end up being more effective than the other candidates'. You can easily see the connection in these ads to the idea that the candidates need to appeal to a more conservative electorate in the primary, and that they will later have to switch gears and appeal to a more mainstream electorates not the general election.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I didn't really find the ads very interesting. They just emphasized what we already knew about each candidate's idealogy. However, we learned in class that tv ads can help candidates gain recognition, and so for an uninformed voter these ads may spark their attention in a certain candidate. Donald Trump's ad was the one that seemed very radical and idealogical to me, and so it might appeal more to primary voters (as we learned), and may further his lead in the polls.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think many of these ads are not that interesting. Political ads are quite boring to me and seeing them leading up to an election is at first good to see but after a while it gets old. After learning in class how ads on tv get the candidate exposure and recognition, it can spark voters to form an opinion on a specific candidate depending on the ad. Donald Trump's ad was very ideological and would definitely appeal more to the primary voters, as we learned in class. Eventually they'll have to appeal to the more mainstream electorates to get more votes on the election.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Overall, I found none of the ads to be truly effective in motivating me against any one candidate, and certainly none of them made me want to support any one candidate. Personally, and I think that this is true for those who are more political aware, ads that have real substance and allow me to learn something significant about a candidate's proposed policies or resume are more likely to actually grab my interest, as they have real substance, and therefore real application to the election. Ads such as the ones that are currently being displayed are quite humorous at times, but they don't have anything that is truly substantial, most of the times simply making broad statements about one topic in an attempt to undermine every action a candidate takes. Not only does that sort of mud slinging reflect poorly on a candidates ethics in my eyes, but it also is highly illogical to align one slip up in a candidate with their whole campaign. However, by giving these ads power, we are promoting doing just that, which then creates a situation where candidates do not work on becoming the best possible option in every way, but they focus instead on a few core issues so as to win the vote of the electorate, even if it means sacrificing the quality of their candidacy in other areas. In short, none of the ads are really appealing to me outside of being funny, however it is possible that they will have an impact on those who hold the issues discussed in them at the top of their list of priorities, and we will have to wait and see how their appearance changes the race.
    Also, as we discussed in class, the lesser known candidates were the first and most eager to get their ads and therefore names out in an attempt to save their campaign going into and then out of the first two caucuses. However, we have only really seen attack ads outside of Trump's largely ideological ad, and not many biographical ads such as those we watched in class, signifying a shift away from personal reputability towards tearing down others in order to win votes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A breakdown of each advertisement, by Eric Bilbrough
    Cruz against Rubio- Attacking someone on like ability doesn't make any sense to me. George Bush was obviously well liked but he still made decisions on national security.
    Rubio campaign- The only advertisement that actually persuaded me to check him out. highlights that he would be able to handle challenges as President.
    Rubio vs. Christie- Effective for swaying the extremely ideological voters of the primary. An ad like this would have never been run in a general election.
    TO BE CONTINUED

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Santorum- Interesting because Ted Cruz is quoted that he wants to make sand glow in the dark. Attacks Cruz and promotes himself.
      Huckabee- Definitely not trustworthy, immediately cuts off after no. Least effective ad so far.
      Donald Trump is becoming a juggernaut candidate. No matter what he or his opponents say, I don't think anything could take him down.

      Delete
  7. What I find most interesting about these ads is that they do little to promote the views and ideas held by the candidate who runs them, but instead focuses on the flaws of a particular opponent. While I understand that this is the purpose of attack-ads, I still find it interesting how these candidates choose to degenerate the election process by slinging mud at one another rather than using the advertising time to show the benefits of voting for each candidate. Political mudslinging has been going on for hundreds of years, however in today's world it just seems juvenile and makes me lose respect for each of the candidates when I should be feeling the desire to vote for one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think these ads are ridiculous, and I'd be pretty embarrassed and disappointed in the American people if their opinion is so easily swayed by bashing advertisements that are completely one-sided. More Americans need to READ and LEARN for themselves. Ads are biased, the media is biased, people need to go out and find the information elsewhere. Mini rant done... I would HOPE these ads wouldn't affect anything, but with the right execution and the wrong images portrayed, I think these ads could make a difference. All of these ads are ridiculous and really low. There's a height of propriety and decorum upheld for other presidential campaign functions yet for ads it all goes out the window and people can sling as much mud as they'd like. It's relative to what we are learning today because personality and image is important. We've learned that broad advertisements don't really help except to get lesser known candidates recognized.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Campaign ads are incredibly annoying to me and it is at these times that I am grateful that I do not have a TV in my house. The ads that I see online are bad enough. Personally, they do not persuade me in any way to vote for a candidate, especially as I have already made my decision based on my own research. I believe that the campaign ads are not factual or truthful at all, they are just an act that the candidates put on to make themselves look good. You can make anyone look nice and personable if you see them with little kids and their family, wearing jeans and casual clothing. It doesn't actually mean anything.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think the fact that we have political advertisements at all is indicative of the type of political culture America has. These ads are sandwiched in between reality TV, commercials for fast food, and "As Seen on TV" spots. These candidates are just another product, and they're trying to sell themselves to a gullible market. What's even worse is that people actually buy what they're selling. It's incredible to me that anyone could form opinions of presidential candidates based on thirty seconds of paid propaganda. We as a nation lack the attention span to do our due diligence and properly research who we will vote for as leader of the free world. I'm not sure these ads will do much good. By the time many see these ads for the first time, they've already formed strong opinions on the candidates and the ads only help to reinforce their perceptions or fire them up on behalf of their preferred candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I personally haven’t seen many negative ads recently. I don’t really pay attention to them to begin with anyways. I believe the act of digging up someone past and darkest secrets to gain an advantage on them in a competition is morally wrong. Why should someone be judged as less of a leader because of what some negative ad says about him or her. I try to focus on positives in life and this generally transfers over in discussions like this. Finally I don’t think this mud-slinging campaign are not very affective and for me at least, tarnishes the campaigners credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think ads are definitely fading into obscurity. Personally they don't appeal to me. I don't think they appeal to the younger generation in general. So, as we get older and TV becomes less popular and things such as Netflix and HBO and Showtime increase in popularity, we will see a phasing out of TV ads. As we read, a lot of times TV ads don't carry much weight in an election. Overall I think TV ads are futile and contribute to the gigantic money pit that is a campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Personally, these ads did not persuade me to vote for or against any specific candidate. As Megan said, searching through someone's past to find his "negatives" to use against him is wrong. Usually, it makes the candidate who endorsed the commercial look bad as well. Mostly all of the TV ads that I have seen in recent elections have been very negative and I can't stand to even watch them. I do not think that TV ads are very effective at all, even in primary elections. I hope that at least some, and hopefully a majority, of Americans see that these thirty-second TV ads slandering other candidates provide no useful information whatsoever as to whom to vote for and are a waste of money.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.