Obama has released a new ad that attacks Romney for raising taxes during his time as Governor of Massachusetts.
The extreme levity of the tone of this ad makes the attack quite grating.
It reminds me of a time when I first dropped my lunch tray in the dinning room at school the most annoying little brat in the class tried to lead the piss-taking. To my surprise and delight, everyone laughed at his eagerness to poke fun at me, rather than at my poor platter management.
At that exact moment I realised, as I cleared my plate of Pasta King spaghetti off the lino flooring, you can’t be really smug and annoying yourself and then expect others to follow you in mocking someone else.
Ohio, home to the US automotive industry, is one of the states that will decide whether or not Obama retains his Presidency.
The fact that Obama bailed out the car industry and saved it from collapse is one of the policies that his supporters point to as proof of the Democrat candidate’s economic leadership credentials.
This ad accuses Romney of campaigning to let the vehicle manufacturers crash and burn and will likely be plastered across the state’s local TV stations.
The bit where Romney is supposedly pleading guilty to this accusation in an interview has an untimely cut in it, which adds in a significant element of doubt as to the veracity of the claim.
The ad would have been more believably and convincing had it stayed positive and stuck to the fairly incontrovertible fact that Obama saved the car industry in Ohio.
It must be tempting to fling mud at every opportunity in such a tight race, but I fear in this advert Obama’s team might end up with some of it back on it’s own windscreen.
On October 20th a demonstration for a campaign called ‘A Future that Works’ is taking place in central London. The campaign is being organised by The Trade Union Congress (TUC), is supported by various left wing organisations and is calling for a rethink of the current coalition government’s economic policy.
Ed Miliband, the Leader of The Opposition, has publicly agreed to attend the march.
Given a free choice, undoubtedly, Ed Miliband would not be joining the demonstration. Polling seems to show that the public think that:
1. Ed Miliband is left-wing.
2. The Labour Party can’t be trusted with the economy and are obsessed with state spending of borrowed public money.
3. The trade unions have too firm a grip on the direction of the Labour Party.
With points 1 to 3 in mind, attending this demonstration is possibly the worst tactic that Ed Miliband could employ to improve his chances of winning a general election.
However, as Ed Miliband was effectively handed the leadership of the Labour Party by trade unions votes and that they are also the organisations bankrolling his whole Opposition operation, he has been compelled by union bosses to attend and therefore has little choice in the matter.
Being The Leader of the Opposition of the United Kingdom and being forced to do something that you don’t want to do is pretty embarrassing. And this hasn’t gone unnoticed by The Conservative Party who have today released ‘Red Ed’s Sponsored Walk‘.
The site has been made to look like a charity donation site that someone who is fundraising might create. It accuses Ed Miliband of only turning up to march (or Sponsored Walk, as the site refers to it) is to keep his party’s cash flow at an acceptable level.
There’s some lovely little touches in there and this will doubtless by very popular with the Conservative Party faithful.
Team Obama have released a website where voters are promised the details on Mitt Romney’s $5 trillion tax plan. However, like a classic schoolboy ruse, when users try and click on the button to ‘get the details’ it dodges your cursor and moves away.
Quick, simple and amusing sites like these – frustratingly for those of us who pour countless hours of work into elaborate creative content – are always popular and are sent around the web within hours of their deployment.
It’s a nice site to motivate the base and something fun for a Friday afternoon.
I’m very late to this, but here is a video mocking Mitt Romney – Gagnam Style.
The video featuring a singing, dancing doppelgänger of Mitt Romney is a parody of what is the viral hit of the year (below).
The production values are high and the attacks – along the now-well-established lines of Romney’s wealth, big business agenda and derogatory remarks about the 47% – are very amusing.
It’s got 2 million votes so far and still very much growing.
One my favourite things about the US elections is the brands that seek to capitalise on the public excitement and wall-to-wall media coverage of all things political by releasing contextual content.
This spot for FedEx by BBDO New York is a classic example.
I would imagine that FedEx print shops get a relatively significant amount of business from the various candidates and campaigns being run. So this ad will likely be to do both a brand job on a national scale and also push inventory at a local level.
Commentators have now, thankfully, stopped calling every election on earth “the first internet election”. However, during this Presidential contest there has been relatively little written around the web campaigns of each candidate (at least compared to 4 years ago).
This is slightly surprising as platforms, such as Twitter, that were still relatively niche in 2008 are now reaching massive audiences across all demographics and are much more likely to be having tangible effects on the result.
Open-site.org have created an interesting infographic showing social media activity for this year’s US presidential election compared to that 4 years ago (as well as a host of other comparative statistics).
The difference is, as you might expect, huge. For example, there was 1.8 million tweets relating to the Presidential election on polling day in 2008. That number of tweets are posted around every 6 minutes this year.
(Thanks to Lillian for sending).