I liked Christine O’Donnell’s opening ad line of “I’m not a witch,” for lumping all of the criticism of O’Donnell together and labeling it with the wackiest and most ridiculous one.
Here’s the follow-up, which . . . well, decide for yourself.
Fred “Demonsheep” Davis is an ad genius, so I’ll defer to his judgment. But I don’t know if I would have continued to parry the criticism; I might have gone straight to the kitchen-table issues.
Instead, O’Donnell begins, “I didn’t go to Yale.” Er, no, but she’s been accused of serially misrepresenting her education record. She continues, “I didn’t inherit millions, like my opponent.” Besides the slight dollop of envy it suggests, it’s a poor defense to the accusations of stiffing former employees. Again, if the aim is to make the race about what’s happening in Washington or what Chris Coons would do in office, turn to those issues a bit quicker — Election Day is in less than four weeks!
Finally, the slogan “I’m you” recurs again, twice, and I’m not sure how far that will carry her. It’s clear what they were going for, but perhaps, “I’m not the establishment” or “I’m not Washington,” or “I’m the only candidate that’s as angry as you are about what’s going on in Washington.” I find it too easy to imagine a voter saying, “You’re not me.” For starters, if you went to Yale, she’s explicitly saying she’s not you.
Maybe folks will love this ad, but to me it feels like a misstep.
I'm with Jim here. She needed to allude to or address the attacks on her but without seeming to be consumed by them. I thought the "I'm you" was too much even in the first ad. But she herself is very good. So I say keep running her talking directly to the camera, but have her talk substantively on health care, spending, jobs, taxes and her oppenent!
I guess she feels she can dispense with the Yale alumni vote in Delaware, whilst being down 16 points in the polls.
With her constant swipes at people, this woman strikes me as being insecure, and her uninspired campaign is out of gas already. Her million dollar war chest won't save her.
I don't think I agree with you, Jim. O'Donnell *is* talking about issues---tax. It's just that the transition was so natural you didn't realize she moved on from parrying personal attacks on her and accusing her opponent of being a tax-and-spend liberal.
We will see which issue she tackles next, but this ad does address a substantive issue that everyone is concerned with this year, especially with the Congress not extending Bush tax cuts (and DE seat being one of those that will matter for lameduck session).
Jim doesnt like it much cuz he was after all a Castle supporter initially...LOL; the fact that he repeats the "accusations" on CO'Donnel as something legit (carried mostly by what Palin would refer to as lame stream media) also elucidates that.
There is a reason why pple like Davis are ad men and others like Jim are'nt. There maybe "kitchen table" issues in normal times, but these are'nt Normal times. There is a Singular overarching issue this election cycle, which is awakening people to the plague (of epic proportions hitherto unseen in American history arguably) that has gripped DC politics and power circles. This ad addresses that.
Kitchen table issues exist every cycle, but How many election cycles have you had a tea party for example?
To add, inheritance (by the opponent) is key to point out since Income tax increases don't affect pple like Coons whose Wealth is off Inheritances (where only cap gains/dividend taxes may apply if that, not knowing how the inheritance is set up difficult to guess).It ain't "envy" at all, but highlighting the hypocrisy of Coons who wants to raise Income Taxes b y letting W tax cuts expire.
Also, one does'nt think most who went to an Ivy League School would take offense at some one who says they din't go to one (all to highlight their average person status); except maybe the dedicated Coons' Libs whose votes she ain't getting anyways.
One criticism is (I ain't an ad man either, so...LOL, so what do I know) I wish she would wear a different brighter dress for some of the ads.
reader:
"Also, one does'nt think most who went to an Ivy League School would take offense at some one who says they din't go to one (all to highlight their average person status)..."
*****************
Why would she want to highlight her average person status? The campaigns that are generating the most excitement, like: Toomey for Senate, PA; Johnson for Senate, WI; Rubio for Senate, FL; Raese for Senate, WV and others, all have candidates who are anything but average.
I know what she's doing. She's relying on a subtly conveyed meme which says the following: Beware of intellectuals and educated people. It's in fact a type of identity politics, a crass and lowly form, with a long pedigree. And I sure am fed up with it.
Assuming this ad is a transition to more meaty issue-driven ads, I think this kind of ad is effective and necessary. Where the first ad addressed the bad publicity and defined who she isn't, this ad puts out an affirmative image defining who she is.
I would guess that the type of ads to come will be the more conventional type, with still shots and large text, and not the hyper-ingratiating appeal from her directly to the camera. This particular ad will help in htos future ads substitute a professional-looking image of her, rather than the footage from an old talk show where she made a lot of unusual statements.
You're what they refer to in a popular radio show as "seminar caller" except you a seminar commenter, i.e., a Lib (or a RINO castle supporter still!) faking as a conservative all to vent on another conservative. The difference between the legit and the seminar is easily identified by the substance of what the person says.
You "fed up" w. someone who says she dint go to Ivy League just like 99.99% of Americans?....LOL, even spoofs on "seminar writers" don't get any better... Also you fallacious big time there there when you equate not going to Ivy League Yale as automatically not "educated" or not "intellectual". Bloatedly condescending, Elitist wannabe, and ofcourse Wrong.
Obviously there are a series of ads of the "I'm You" theme. I think it's a wonderful ad because it is simple and quiet. Unfortunately it's impact has been lessened because it is being analyzed to death. It must be horribly difficult to produce a political ad that captures attention but isn't scrutinized. These days it seems that if one manages to be individualistic, unique, and creative one also becomes viral on the Internet, and then is opined on by all the bloggers and talking heads ad nauseam.
@19:36 well you said you were all "excited" by Toomey, Rubio, Johnson, Raese etc - conservatives but none of them Libertarian like say the Ron Paul kind anyway;
The kind that would desire not having coons. Seems pretty straight forward to me. Especially when you take away cap-n-trade, which is dead anyway.
Regarding Toomey and the like, I was speaking of general levels of excitement, not just among libertarians. And exactly why do these people have to be strictly libertarian for me to like them?
Dont know why Toomey or Raese or others in the list are any more exciting than Odonnel, in fact an Odonnel win would more exciting cuz its Bite Me's seat......
so best for ex Castle supporters (even libertarians who loved the 80%Plus Dem Voting RINO...LOL), and others who don want coons, to get behind COD instead of questioning whether her ad is good or bad. (That Yale was also likely directed at the current marxist ignoramus in the WH as well)
Dont ya think CODonnel is better any day than the gaffe ridden, Lying, once Plagiarist, Racist, and Now Veep, Bite Me who was DE Senator for years and years? Why judge CoDonnel as if she is the POPE????
Katrina Trinko, over on NRO's 'Battle 10' has a short CNN Q. and A. clip which gives a very favorable sense of who Christine O'Donnell is and where she stands on key issues. I do think Ms. O'Donnell is more in tune with Delaware voters than most people realize, and I hope she can get that message out in three short weeks, though all the 'noise.'
BTW, does Delaware have early voting? I hope not, O'Donnell needs the time. (I have already voted absentee, in Texas, for example).
What we have here is an incredibly flawed candidate trying to downplay those flaws by intimating that any one of us could have fallen "victim" to the same circumstances that beset her.
I'm you?!?!
Uh, no. No, you're not. You're you, I'm me.
You are running for senate in DE, I am not.
You got your house foreclosed on in 2008, I like +90% of homeowners continue to make timely payments.
You filed a $6.9mm gender discrimination (nearly impossible to prove but sure to make headlines) suit against a former employer, I did not.
You have/had a habit of appearing on long-ignored 90s cable talk shows spouting outlandish statements the only purpose of which appears to be angling for a return invite, I do/did not.
Methinks, you suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder.
Not in the classic sense in that you can't concentrate on any one thing for more than a few minutes at a time. But rather, that you crave attention so completely that you continually thrust yourself into the spotlight, doesn't matter why- just that it is.
Anyone else think that the upshot of O'Donnell's soon-to-be-losing campaign efforts will be Christine securing a guest contributor role on FoxNews?
I'm with Jim. This line of advertisement doesn't work for me. the "I'm you" line practically writes its own political cartoon:
Christine O'Donnel: "I'm you"
Voter: "well, I'm sorry to tell you that nobody is going to vote for me either."
I hope her forthcoming ads do something, anything to encourage voters to support her rather than just identify with her. She's running for Senate, not citizen.
I'm with Jim here. She needed to allude to or address the attacks on her but without seeming to be consumed by them. I thought the "I'm you" was too much even in the first ad. But she herself is very good. So I say keep running her talking directly to the camera, but have her talk substantively on health care, spending, jobs, taxes and her oppenent!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI guess she feels she can dispense with the Yale alumni vote in Delaware, whilst being down 16 points in the polls.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWith her constant swipes at people, this woman strikes me as being insecure, and her uninspired campaign is out of gas already. Her million dollar war chest won't save her.
I don't think I agree with you, Jim. O'Donnell *is* talking about issues---tax. It's just that the transition was so natural you didn't realize she moved on from parrying personal attacks on her and accusing her opponent of being a tax-and-spend liberal.
We will see which issue she tackles next, but this ad does address a substantive issue that everyone is concerned with this year, especially with the Congress not extending Bush tax cuts (and DE seat being one of those that will matter for lameduck session).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJim doesnt like it much cuz he was after all a Castle supporter initially...LOL; the fact that he repeats the "accusations" on CO'Donnel as something legit (carried mostly by what Palin would refer to as lame stream media) also elucidates that.
There is a reason why pple like Davis are ad men and others like Jim are'nt. There maybe "kitchen table" issues in normal times, but these are'nt Normal times. There is a Singular overarching issue this election cycle, which is awakening people to the plague (of epic proportions hitherto unseen in American history arguably) that has gripped DC politics and power circles. This ad addresses that.
Kitchen table issues exist every cycle, but How many election cycles have you had a tea party for example?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo add, inheritance (by the opponent) is key to point out since Income tax increases don't affect pple like Coons whose Wealth is off Inheritances (where only cap gains/dividend taxes may apply if that, not knowing how the inheritance is set up difficult to guess).It ain't "envy" at all, but highlighting the hypocrisy of Coons who wants to raise Income Taxes b y letting W tax cuts expire.
Also, one does'nt think most who went to an Ivy League School would take offense at some one who says they din't go to one (all to highlight their average person status); except maybe the dedicated Coons' Libs whose votes she ain't getting anyways.
One criticism is (I ain't an ad man either, so...LOL, so what do I know) I wish she would wear a different brighter dress for some of the ads.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusereader:
"Also, one does'nt think most who went to an Ivy League School would take offense at some one who says they din't go to one (all to highlight their average person status)..."
*****************
Why would she want to highlight her average person status? The campaigns that are generating the most excitement, like: Toomey for Senate, PA; Johnson for Senate, WI; Rubio for Senate, FL; Raese for Senate, WV and others, all have candidates who are anything but average.
I know what she's doing. She's relying on a subtly conveyed meme which says the following: Beware of intellectuals and educated people. It's in fact a type of identity politics, a crass and lowly form, with a long pedigree. And I sure am fed up with it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAssuming this ad is a transition to more meaty issue-driven ads, I think this kind of ad is effective and necessary. Where the first ad addressed the bad publicity and defined who she isn't, this ad puts out an affirmative image defining who she is.
I would guess that the type of ads to come will be the more conventional type, with still shots and large text, and not the hyper-ingratiating appeal from her directly to the camera. This particular ad will help in htos future ads substitute a professional-looking image of her, rather than the footage from an old talk show where she made a lot of unusual statements.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou're what they refer to in a popular radio show as "seminar caller" except you a seminar commenter, i.e., a Lib (or a RINO castle supporter still!) faking as a conservative all to vent on another conservative. The difference between the legit and the seminar is easily identified by the substance of what the person says.
You "fed up" w. someone who says she dint go to Ivy League just like 99.99% of Americans?....LOL, even spoofs on "seminar writers" don't get any better... Also you fallacious big time there there when you equate not going to Ivy League Yale as automatically not "educated" or not "intellectual". Bloatedly condescending, Elitist wannabe, and ofcourse Wrong.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusemy prior note was addressed to @18:49
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Lib (or a RINO castle supporter still!) faking as a conservative all to vent on another conservative."
************************
Never said I was a conservative. In case you haven't noticed, a lot of libertarians read this magazine (and a few write for it).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObviously there are a series of ads of the "I'm You" theme. I think it's a wonderful ad because it is simple and quiet. Unfortunately it's impact has been lessened because it is being analyzed to death. It must be horribly difficult to produce a political ad that captures attention but isn't scrutinized. These days it seems that if one manages to be individualistic, unique, and creative one also becomes viral on the Internet, and then is opined on by all the bloggers and talking heads ad nauseam.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think the ad would of been much more effective if she showed how she was brought up and how her parents raised her in middle class backdrop
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@19:36 well you said you were all "excited" by Toomey, Rubio, Johnson, Raese etc - conservatives but none of them Libertarian like say the Ron Paul kind anyway;
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLibertarian??!!
What libertarian would desire Castle?!
What libertarian thinks all that matters is having (R)s elected, no matter how liberal??
First for me, that's for sure.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe kind that would desire not having coons. Seems pretty straight forward to me. Especially when you take away cap-n-trade, which is dead anyway.
Regarding Toomey and the like, I was speaking of general levels of excitement, not just among libertarians. And exactly why do these people have to be strictly libertarian for me to like them?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDont know why Toomey or Raese or others in the list are any more exciting than Odonnel, in fact an Odonnel win would more exciting cuz its Bite Me's seat......
so best for ex Castle supporters (even libertarians who loved the 80%Plus Dem Voting RINO...LOL), and others who don want coons, to get behind COD instead of questioning whether her ad is good or bad. (That Yale was also likely directed at the current marxist ignoramus in the WH as well)
Dont ya think CODonnel is better any day than the gaffe ridden, Lying, once Plagiarist, Racist, and Now Veep, Bite Me who was DE Senator for years and years? Why judge CoDonnel as if she is the POPE????
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseKatrina Trinko, over on NRO's 'Battle 10' has a short CNN Q. and A. clip which gives a very favorable sense of who Christine O'Donnell is and where she stands on key issues. I do think Ms. O'Donnell is more in tune with Delaware voters than most people realize, and I hope she can get that message out in three short weeks, though all the 'noise.'
BTW, does Delaware have early voting? I hope not, O'Donnell needs the time. (I have already voted absentee, in Texas, for example).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat we have here is an incredibly flawed candidate trying to downplay those flaws by intimating that any one of us could have fallen "victim" to the same circumstances that beset her.
I'm you?!?!
Uh, no. No, you're not. You're you, I'm me.
You are running for senate in DE, I am not.
You got your house foreclosed on in 2008, I like +90% of homeowners continue to make timely payments.
You filed a $6.9mm gender discrimination (nearly impossible to prove but sure to make headlines) suit against a former employer, I did not.
You have/had a habit of appearing on long-ignored 90s cable talk shows spouting outlandish statements the only purpose of which appears to be angling for a return invite, I do/did not.
Methinks, you suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder.
Not in the classic sense in that you can't concentrate on any one thing for more than a few minutes at a time. But rather, that you crave attention so completely that you continually thrust yourself into the spotlight, doesn't matter why- just that it is.
Anyone else think that the upshot of O'Donnell's soon-to-be-losing campaign efforts will be Christine securing a guest contributor role on FoxNews?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm with Jim. This line of advertisement doesn't work for me. the "I'm you" line practically writes its own political cartoon:
Christine O'Donnel: "I'm you"
Voter: "well, I'm sorry to tell you that nobody is going to vote for me either."
I hope her forthcoming ads do something, anything to encourage voters to support her rather than just identify with her. She's running for Senate, not citizen.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse