If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Stop the presses. Campaign advertising *is* effective. This is a game changer, people   (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 21
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

455 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jul 2012 at 11:19 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



21 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-11 11:21:47 AM  
Citizens of the general public are farking stupid....
 
2012-07-11 11:23:50 AM  

Citrate1007: Citizens of the general public are farking stupid....


This.

Campaign ads are designed to influence the easily influenced.

If you find that campaign ads are actually helping you decide how to vote, you probably shouldn't be voting at all.
 
2012-07-11 11:24:25 AM  
Well, there goes the premise on which Citizens United was decided. Not that it wasn't obvious to almost everyone not sitting on the Supreme Court what a lousy decision it was.
 
2012-07-11 11:25:07 AM  
Another Poll Shows Bain Attacks Are Working

This is bad news...for Republicans.
 
2012-07-11 11:27:23 AM  
Or how about this: nominating a weak candidate with no principles and a record of making millions firing American workers then stuffing the money into offshore bank accounts is probably not a smart campaign strategy.
 
2012-07-11 11:27:37 AM  
You mean framing your opponent in the minds of the voters before he has a chance to frame himself is effective? I , for one, am shocked.
 
2012-07-11 11:28:50 AM  
CNN: Please buy our ad space. We swear it is effective.

/pay no attention to the fact that we suck and millions of Americans are turning away from us.
 
2012-07-11 11:30:52 AM  
Three quarters of those voters .... and 16% say..... Seven in 10 voters ...... while 12% say.

Nobody ever accused CNN of being consistent.
 
2012-07-11 11:31:05 AM  
"I'm not concerned about the poor"

"I like firing people"

"Lemon. Wet. Good."

i.huffpost.com
 
2012-07-11 11:38:05 AM  
1. Undermine critical thinking and rational thought in the populace
2. Overwhelm all other forms of communication with advertising
3. Profit?
 
2012-07-11 11:50:11 AM  

NateGrey: Another Poll Shows Bain Attacks Are Working

This is bad news...for Republicans.


It really is.

If the mantra of this election becomes "It's the economy, stupid" and the Obama campaign can continue to effectively nail Romney on his tenure of firing thousands of employees and shipping jobs overseas to make himself rich, it's over.

Support for ObamaCare has improved since the SCOTUS ruling, so the Republicans are losing the battle there, and the Red state governors who are telling millions of their poor that they can't have Medicaid "because socialism" may backfire (long shot, but possible).

Obama has taken away the War on Terror from the right by getting Bin Laden, successfully exiting Iraq, and showing progress in Afghanistan.

It may not be the landslide of 2008, but it's looking more and more like Obama will get a minimum of 290 electoral votes. Even InTrade is currently tracking Obama at 290. Even without Virginia, Florida and Pennsylvania (and their voter suppression tactics), he's at 270. 538 has him at 294 and he's been holding steady there since the SCOTUS ruling.

While I wish Obama was more of a progressive and less of a authoritarian corporatist, the man is a great campaigner and has a solid campaign staff. Romney is not and his campaign staff have seemed to be amateurs. Despite the media bias toward Romney to make it a horse race, Romney's inability to frame the message is taking its toll. And while Romney is beating Obama in terms of money, it's just not working for him due to diminishing returns and the Pres's free press by simply being the President.
 
2012-07-11 12:02:31 PM  

EighthDay: successfully exiting Iraq,


Agreed with the rest of your post, but let's be honest: we're stil in Iraq. We're just there with expensive ass 'contractors' instead of military personel.
 
2012-07-11 12:14:53 PM  
not M.A.D. ???
Some Nukes are better than other Nukes.


So basically, Romney & the GOP are getting back what they serve out.

hmm...it's hard when you find out some play "the game" better than you do.

/not everything being equal, having a better quarterback helps too...
 
2012-07-11 12:29:47 PM  
Well, the game has changed considering the Citizens United Ruling and the amount of ad money Romney is able to raise because of it. Thanks SCOTUS.
 
2012-07-11 01:16:23 PM  
"Priorities USA's recent ad campaign on Romney's record as CEO of Bain Capital had a clear negative impact on perceptions of Romney across a variety of metrics," the memo reads.

^__^

For the memo-reading-challenged among us here's that again in handy pictograph form...

i293.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-11 01:37:15 PM  

actualhuman: EighthDay: successfully exiting Iraq,

Agreed with the rest of your post, but let's be honest: we're stil in Iraq. We're just there with expensive ass 'contractors' instead of military personel.


Decided to do some checking on this, and what I came up with is that we have 5000 security contractors in Iraq. Not only is that drastically lower than the number of contractors we had there when we did have troops there as well, but they're primarily charged with protecting the US embassy, not with any other kind of operations. It's still a bit troubling (I'd honestly rather those be US troops, though I'm sure diplomatic concerns with Iraq played a role there), but it's not quite what you're talking about, implying we just replaced our troops there with contractors.
 
2012-07-11 01:46:22 PM  

HeartBurnKid: actualhuman: EighthDay: successfully exiting Iraq,

Agreed with the rest of your post, but let's be honest: we're stil in Iraq. We're just there with expensive ass 'contractors' instead of military personel.

Decided to do some checking on this, and what I came up with is that we have 5000 security contractors in Iraq. Not only is that drastically lower than the number of contractors we had there when we did have troops there as well, but they're primarily charged with protecting the US embassy, not with any other kind of operations. It's still a bit troubling (I'd honestly rather those be US troops, though I'm sure diplomatic concerns with Iraq played a role there), but it's not quite what you're talking about, implying we just replaced our troops there with contractors.


Exactly.

Sure, we still have several thousand troops there (in whatever name), but how many countries do we NOT have troops in at this point?
 
2012-07-11 02:18:41 PM  
There was a piece a while back about a Democratic leaning group that had been quietly researching which types of ad were most effective; I know it got submitted to fark, but I don't think it got a greenlight.

But anyway... not all ads are equally effective. The democrats have been testing to figure out which ones are most effective, and using those.
 
2012-07-11 05:55:47 PM  
Campaign advertising *is* effective.

Actually, we'd do just fine without it.

We know who the two candidates are and what they stand for.

Why the billions of dollars of wasted money?
 
2012-07-11 06:27:32 PM  
FTFA: In the battlegrounds, one in 12 say the commercials have changed their minds about President Obama or Republican Mitt Romney


And this cost how much money?
 
2012-07-13 12:03:29 AM  
Campaign advertising is effective, says organization whose income is from advertising.
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report