PDA

View Full Version : A terrific political ad.....



Norman Bernstein
12-01-2017, 08:32 AM
...certainly topical! :):):)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=103&v=CQL37wcgI6k

Paul Pless
12-01-2017, 08:34 AM
never heard of her
i find her advert full of sexual bigotry

Norman Bernstein
12-01-2017, 08:36 AM
She does make a good point, though.... lacking a penis, she won't be exposing it to staffers :)

TomF
12-01-2017, 08:43 AM
never heard of her
i find her advert full of sexual bigotrySure it is. But she has a point - and one which will resonate with a lot of voters. Particularly female voters.

amish rob
12-01-2017, 10:18 AM
Oh, Iím all for women in office, but Iím not for negative selling.

I would rather an ad focusing on her.

It is silly, though, and I did chuckle.

Peace,
Robert

Chris Coose
12-01-2017, 10:39 AM
I'd vote that.

mmd
12-01-2017, 10:54 AM
Rob brings up a salient point. Political campaign ads used to be mostly about trumpeting what the candidate can do and what their electable qualities are; now, campaign ads are mostly about trumpeting what is wrong with the other candidate. I'd rather have the candidate tell me about them and what they can do for me. Times are indeed a-changing.

S.V. Airlie
12-01-2017, 10:57 AM
Rob brings up a salient point. Political campaign ads used to be mostly about trumpeting what the candidate can do and what their electable qualities are; now, campaign ads are mostly about trumpeting what is wrong with the other candidate. I'd rather have the candidate tell me about them and what they can do for me. Times are indeed a-changing.Like Roy Moore you mean?

mmd
12-01-2017, 11:04 AM
Is there a defined question in there, Jamie, or are you just slap-happy about waving the name of that deplorable in every thread?

amish rob
12-01-2017, 11:05 AM
Rob brings up a salient point. Political campaign ads used to be mostly about trumpeting what the candidate can do and what their electable qualities are; now, campaign ads are mostly about trumpeting what is wrong with the other candidate. I'd rather have the candidate tell me about them and what they can do for me. Times are indeed a-changing.

The other thing that bothers me is the implication any male she runs against is going to be a potential “penis waver”. That is hogwash.
Assuming a man is going to be a sexual predator is like assuming a woman is incapable of doing the job. In her ad, she lambasts the idea that women can’t lead, then strengthens the notion men are all potential creeps.

Too broad and negative a brush for an enlightened candidate. In my opinion.

I’d rather she use the time to expound on herself than hitch onto the latest news cycle and tailor her ads to that. What about MI? What are you gonna do for the state?
I got it! How about an ad talking about how she’ll be tough on the type crimes we’re seeeing lately? Ooh! Brilliant. No fingers to point, no negative selling, and a perception of strength, rather than a petty attack. It seems petty, to me, the ad. It seems more like an SNL sketch.

Which is sad, because she seems a smart, capable woman.

Peace,
Robert

Breakaway
12-01-2017, 11:10 AM
But, there is only one way we can KNOW she does not have a penis. That way is to show us.
:d

Kevin

TomF
12-01-2017, 11:13 AM
Rob, she's being topical.

The argument she says in the ad she is needing to counter .. is that it would be wrong to have an all-female ticket. That she shouldn't be on the ticket if the 3 other Dems nominated for other positions are all women. That it's a liability to have an all female ticket. What she's saying is that this Fall, it ought to be obvious that there are some undeniable advantages to having women on the ballot.

It's more important, I agree, what she actually says she'll do. I presume that this isn't her only "key message" to voters, and actually, she alludes in the ad itself to her history respecting a bunch of specific policy issues. But y'know, her take on those issues would probably sound quite a bit like, say, Al Franken's take. And suddenly, he's not effective on them anymore.

I think we'll see more of this, actually. And that it's gonna be a shame, because really capable men either won't be elected, or won't be able to stay in office. Because of what amounts to risk management stuff.

S.V. Airlie
12-01-2017, 11:17 AM
Is there a defined question in there, Jamie, or are you just slap-happy about waving the name of that deplorable in every thread?I'm slap happy watching Flynn go down in flames, found guilty and is driving Trump bonkers, so yes. Haven't had such a good day in ages it feels like!

amish rob
12-01-2017, 11:29 AM
Rob, she's being topical.

The argument she says in the ad she is needing to counter .. is that it would be wrong to have an all-female ticket. That she shouldn't be on the ticket if the 3 other Dems nominated for other positions are all women. That it's a liability to have an all female ticket. What she's saying is that this Fall, it ought to be obvious that there are some undeniable advantages to having women on the ballot.

It's more important, I agree, what she actually says she'll do. I presume that this isn't her only "key message" to voters, and actually, she alludes in the ad itself to her history respecting a bunch of specific policy issues. But y'know, her take on those issues would probably sound quite a bit like, say, Al Franken's take. And suddenly, he's not effective on them anymore.

I think we'll see more of this, actually. And that it's gonna be a shame, because really capable men either won't be elected, or won't be able to stay in office. Because of what amounts to risk management stuff.


Hereís the deal.

I never find it acceptable for people beset by stereotypes to trade in them.

Her answer to women being incapable is men are all ďpenis waversĒ? Seems to weaken her position, to me.

How about her answer to she doesnít belong there be why she does belong there? Instead, itís more mud slinging garbage. I understand answer in kind, but I prefer my approach:

Be politely unkind.:)

This is just my opinion, too. My own way of seeing. I donít do that, and I donít think it helps anyone else to. It sure doesnít raise her above the fray, which I wish she would endeavor to do.

I would have loved a serious ad about the issue, for example. What would she do to handle the problem legally, going forward, for example?

Then again, what do I know? :)

Peace,
Robert

Andrew Craig-Bennett
12-01-2017, 11:35 AM
I thought that she was amusing whilst getting a serious point across. I like that, and I would vote for her.

S.V. Airlie
12-01-2017, 11:35 AM
Rob, I think it's referring to people, the penis wavers, in positions of power in Hollywood and in elected office, not you or me. The number of accusations are getting longer and they are all in the groups I mentioned.

TomF
12-01-2017, 11:35 AM
Rob, I mostly agree with you.

I do feel, though, that someone needed to point out the obvious. That one can't wave a penis one doesn't have. That every one of the headline-making downfalls this season about sexual harassment has been about a man, who's otherwise often done exceptional work in the field.

What she's saying (with I'd argue a wink and a nudge) is that she's a good risk. Not only is she solid on the issues that other Dem aspirants care about, but she's not got a particular flap of tissue which seems to be a problem for some folks to know how to handle. ;)

As I say, it's the elephant in the room. I was talking about this the other day with Herself, as we watched a panel discussing some guy's fall from high position - might have been Lauer's. The panel was 100% female. We're gonna see more of that, and see the proportions of genders in panels shift when they're discussing other issues too. If only because of corporate risk management.

amish rob
12-01-2017, 11:49 AM
Rob, I mostly agree with you.

I do feel, though, that someone needed to point out the obvious. That one can't wave a penis one doesn't have. That every one of the headline-making downfalls this season about sexual harassment has been about a man, who's otherwise often done exceptional work in the field.

What she's saying (with I'd argue a wink and a nudge) is that she's a good risk. Not only is she solid on the issues that other Dem aspirants care about, but she's not got a particular flap of tissue which seems to be a problem for some folks to know how to handle. ;)

As I say, it's the elephant in the room. I was talking about this the other day with Herself, as we watched a panel discussing some guy's fall from high position - might have been Lauer's. The panel was 100% female. We're gonna see more of that, and see the proportions of genders in panels shift when they're discussing other issues too. If only because of corporate risk management.


To be crystal clear, clear as an azure sky, I am on this ladyís side. I think sheís right, but I think the ad will backfire.

I understand why the first Euros were asked where their women were. ;)

I just think this woman could have made the point without implying all men. How can there be a single male candidate considered fit for office, if he has a penis and may wave it?

Just a very slippery slope is all. Better to talk about actual events than hypothetical maybes. Shoot, why trust yourself alone with a male cop? He has a penis, after all... Male doctor? Male judge? Male fireman? All penis havers.

The idea is to shout down actual penis wavers, not every potential penis waver, right?

If I, for example, were running against her, a person wouldnít be too off base assumimg I may walk around with my stuff out. Simply because I have a penis. Guilt by association, and Iíd have to prove my innocence.

You know what I mean? Itís no different implying men canít do a job because of a penis than saying women canít do the job for lack of a penis (or whyever it is women are considered by the electorate to be unfit for office. Thatís weird, to me.)

Again, I think itís funny, and cute, and clever, but ultimately I donít think it helps her chances or politics in general. They do it, too, is becoming a common refrain, it seems. ;)

Peace,
Robert

TomF
12-01-2017, 11:52 AM
I know exactly what you mean, and as another person with that dangling flap of tissue, it irritates.

But I don't think the ad will backfire. It may not help her especially, but I don't think it will send folks off to vote for someone else.

Yeadon
12-01-2017, 11:59 AM
Fun ad. Too long.

David G
12-01-2017, 01:38 PM
never heard of her
i find her advert full of sexual bigotry


Rob brings up a salient point. Political campaign ads used to be mostly about trumpeting what the candidate can do and what their electable qualities are; now, campaign ads are mostly about trumpeting what is wrong with the other candidate. I'd rather have the candidate tell me about them and what they can do for me. Times are indeed a-changing.

I'd rather have a candidate talk about what policies they think will be good for the electorate... and not just me personally. And why.

Unfortunately... that seems to be a bit passe'. It has been shown time after time that negative ads work. At least she tried to do something besides a straight attack ad. But yes, it was a bit ham-fisted (and therefore proabably WILL be effective). If I were a candidate - I'd direct my people to write ads that recognized the cynical reality of their effectiveness, while tempering them with some policy commentary... and maybe even some bite-sized philosophical background. Part of what made that ad hamfisted was that she belabored the point. If she had made that point quickly (like a warm-up joke when one is giving a speech) she had plenty of time to throw in some substance as well.

David G
12-01-2017, 01:55 PM
amish - I think you've got a point about civil discourse. I like your thought about people who have suffered from sloppy stereotypes not getting sloppy with them their own selves.

OTOH - this wasn't civil discourse. It was a political ad. It was a parody of the argument she was countering. And the crafty (or perhaps just lucky) thing is that many WILL simply take it at face value... as many of us here seem to be... give a nod toward the humor (without seriously considering the issue of stereotyping), and say, 'She's got a point, I'd vote for her'.

John Smith
12-01-2017, 02:03 PM
I'm waiting for a woman candidate for something to point out how all the mass shootings have been done by men.

skuthorp
12-01-2017, 03:31 PM
Rob, I mostly agree with you.

I do feel, though, that someone needed to point out the obvious. That one can't wave a penis one doesn't have. That every one of the headline-making downfalls this season about sexual harassment has been about a man, who's otherwise often done exceptional work in the field.

What she's saying (with I'd argue a wink and a nudge) is that she's a good risk. Not only is she solid on the issues that other Dem aspirants care about, but she's not got a particular flap of tissue which seems to be a problem for some folks to know how to handle. ;)

As I say, it's the elephant in the room. I was talking about this the other day with Herself, as we watched a panel discussing some guy's fall from high position - might have been Lauer's. The panel was 100% female. We're gonna see more of that, and see the proportions of genders in panels shift when they're discussing other issues too. If only because of corporate risk management.
This is only the beginning, men as a generic are going to be suspect purely because they are men. And that will effect their prospects for positions where there is a choice of genders in applicants in many non-public fields. As Tom says, "If only because of corporate risk management."
And just wait till this major change in attitudes get's down to family level.

#23. That too.

David W Pratt
12-01-2017, 03:57 PM
And, a woman does have a clitoris; it is the embryological homolog of the penis. Given enough male hormones, it will grow to penis size.

TomF
12-01-2017, 04:20 PM
And, a woman does have a clitoris; it is the embryological homolog of the penis. Given enough male hormones, it will grow to penis size.And if female TV anchors or movie producers begin to display them and masturbate in front of staff of the other gender, they should be fired too. I've yet to hear any such reports though.

PeterSibley
12-01-2017, 05:49 PM
I'd vote for her, in that it seems that not having a penis has been a major political liability in US and Australian politics lately.