Rudy Giuliani is running a new advertisement in New Hampshire that the campiagn has named “Ready” and is proudly touting on its websites. The ad, which uses a voiceover fresh out of a “300″ preview, shows images of angry crowds burning flags, shouting in other languages, and protesting. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is suggested to be a madman, Bhutto represents democracy under attack, and an explosion rocks a busy intersection. To top it off, an image of Bin Laden fades into the silhouette of the World Trade Center rubble.
This is supposed to scare you into voting for Rudy. The ad claims that he is tested and ready. But it gives no reasons as to why he is ready. It also neglects to mention that part of the budget to defend the people of New York went to having police officers walk his mistress’s dog. There is a problem with priorities here that the American people may not (and if Iowa was any evidence, do not) like.
The ad also mentions nothing about why Rudy would be the best candidate for fighting terrorism. The only reason this blogger can imagine is that his reckless foreign policies will cause more terrorism, leading to more time spent fighting terrorism.
The politics of fear won in 2002 and 2004 (when Dean ran with a more hopeful message), and the Republicans benefited from it. But if the success of Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama are any indication, hope will be the winning message in 2008. Could we see an end to the politics of fear? Probably not entirely, but polls are showing the Republican national security advantage over Democrats is going away. Voting through fear may loose traction to hope and vision this cycle.
This week marked the first time that candidates were competing head to head with TV ads for the Iowa Caucuses, as John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Chris Dodd all announced ad buys on local networks and cable. The Edwards and Richardson ads are so unique, that one might call the more boilerplate Dodd ad ‘distinctively normal.’
The first two of the three, from Edwards and Richardson, were not what one might call standard TV ads. In Edwards’s 30-second spot, the first 27 seconds feature “everyday-looking” Iowans finishing each others’ sentences about what Congress should do to end the war (the answer is support Edwards’s call to send the same bill that Bush vetoed back to his desk unchanged). The Senator does not come onto the screen until the mandatory “I’m John Edwards, and I approved this message” tag at the end. It is clearly intended to portray the sense that Edwards’s campaign is more about its supporters than its principal, and it drew quite a bit of notice from media when it was first announced.
In Richardson’s two 30-second spots (one is airing currently, the other is sitting in the can to be aired later), the Governor sits at a desk while a middle management-type interviews him for a job. The tone is something akin to the film Office Space, as the interviewer begins by rattling off impressive facts from Richardson’s resume and ends the second ad by saying, “For what we’re looking for, you might be a little overqualified.” Most people will think the ad is funny, but they won’t realize why: it is because, from Richardson’s point of view, the public is behaving like the caricature of the middle manager, ignoring his resume as if experience weren’t important. The ads are intended to change minds with humor, and the media has been buzzing about them ever since they launched.
On Tuesday, Chris Dodd’s campaign released its new Iowa ad, and it provides a stark contrast to Richardson’s and Edwards’s ad in that it follows the fairly standard format of the candidate talking to a camera for 30 seconds. Although Dodd’s was not the first ad to go up, it is the first standard political ad of the campaign to hit the airwaves. In it, Dodd maintains a serious expression while explaining his support of the Reid-Feingold plan in the Senate. Next to Richardson’s informative-but-funny ad and Edwards’s community-oriented, borderline gimmicky ad, Dodd’s looks stately but uninspired.
Perhaps the Dodd camp has made the calculation that they aren’t going to win by trying to run the most inspiring (or inspired) campaign; they see their opening in wonkish policy plans and sober assessments of reality. I couldn’t get them to reveal this entire campaign strategy to me, but I did ask Dodd’s Iowa Press Secretary, Taylor West, about the distinctive seriousness of the new ad. “There can be no more serious issue confronting the nation than how we bring this war to a responsible close,” she began. “[Dodd’s] campaign and his ads reflect his understanding that at a time when the stakes have never been higher for the country, we need proven, bold leadership.”
All this isn’t to say that Senator Dodd does not have a sense of humor, because he does have at least one joke that we know of that he tells regularly on the campaign trail. Still, Dodd’s new web site has launched, and it promises to make full use of all the latest Web 2.0 crazes that often impress netroots activists. Perhaps what we are seeing now is the beginning of Dodd’s repositioning himself to appeal more to policy wonks, technocrats, and bloggers, and this experiment might just work.
Video of all three candidates’ ads is below:
Edwards ad:
Richardson ads (the first is airing now; the one that plays after it in the clip below is likely to air later on):
We recently invited staffers from the Fallon, Culver, and Blouin campaigns to participate in email interviews about working in Iowa politics and about their campaigns. We were interested, first, in seeing which campaigns would even agree to do it. Luckily, all three consented.
From the Mike Blouin campaign, Matt Paul answered our questions. Matt is from Cedar Rapids, and he’s Blouin’s campaign manager. Here’s what he had to say.
IowaProgress: How did you get involved in politics?
Matt: My first political job was in the Mayor’s Office in Cedar Rapids, my hometown, when I was 24.
IP: What do you do in off years when there aren’t elections? (Or
what did you do before you joined this campaign?)
Matt: I worked in Governor Vilsack’s office for seven years. Before working in politics, I worked as a reporter.
IP: In this gubernatorial election, the candidates are using the internet a lot more than they did last time around. What role do you think the internet (both your campaign sites and online news outlets and blogs) will play in this election? In what ways has the internet changed Iowa political campaigning?
Matt: Like all political communication, applications for the internet and electronic media constantly change. Nothing is more vital than a clear message–no matter the outlet. The internet will continue to provide voters the chance to seek out information on their own, to research topics important to them and to create new methods to receive information during an election cycle.
IP: What role do you think students (should) play in Iowa politics?
Matt: Students in Iowa have such an advantage to engage in the political process because of their ability to access the Iowa caucuses. Since Iowa is also a relatively low cost media market, students get to see the important role retail politics play. I think our party does an excellent job of seeking the input and active participation of students and that should absolutely continue. Since Iowa is an aging state, its critical that students stay involved in the process and active in the party so younger voices continue to be heard. We have to make more progress in keeping young people here and making sure our communities give them a reason to stay.
IP: Iowa has a mix of urban voters and rural voters. Is it difficult
to account for both groups in crafting your message?
Matt: No. Iowa needs to grow and that means creating economic opportunity in all parts of the state and remaining committed to growth that embraces diversity and gives local communities the flexibility to chart their own course.
IP: (Campaign-specific question) How involved were you in choosing Dr. McGuire as running-mate? How do you respond to criticism that the choice was made for political reasons (McGuire is pro-choice)?
Matt: I was involved but the decision was ultimately Mike’s to make. Dr. McGuire was selected for one simple reason: she is qualified. Not only is she a medical doctor, she also holds a MBA and has been involved in a number of community organizations serving women and children. She is pro-choice but her selection was based upon her qualifications.
IP: Why is your campaign the best suited to beat Nussle?
Mike has the right experience, vision and ability to lead Iowa forward. He is the only candidate in the race with a strong record of job creation and his unequaled support from legislators is a clear sign that he could bring the statehouse together and make historic progress for all Iowans.
IP: Do you have a funny anecdote you’d like to share? Or anything else to add?
Matt: This is the first time I have ever submitted a blog entry. I suddenly feel very old.
