With a little more than a week left to go until election day, gubetorial canidates Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown are puttting out thier final television aadvertisments.
For Meg Whitman, shes at it again with her "cops choice" ad; this time using a re-edited version from last week, with more cops and more "vote meg". Whitmans message this week is clear, Brown is backed by unions and unions are costing California. In another ad, "puppet", the narrorator explains union groups have spent millions in advertising against Meg and for Jerry Brown, cutting to the image of Jerry Brown as a puppet. The ad works well with Whitman's message, that Brown is a puppet to union groups like teachers. Another Whitman ad, goes directly at Browns involment with teacher unions, claiming his loyalty to them will prevent education reform and charter school development. The ad features warming images of Whitman talking with students, compared to a black and white mugshot of Brown, as the narrator explains Brown is bad for California schools.
Brown is only out this week with 2 new, er one new advertisement. Brown has realesed two nearly iodentical ads, fearturing clips of Whitman and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger saying similar things. For starters, the ad looks like two back-of-the-class students at De Anza made it. Secondly, while the message is powerful, "Whitman and Failed governor Schwarzenegger are too similar", showing a load of similar sound bites is a less powerful way to proclaim it.
Meg Whitman wins this final week, while her repetitive cop ad did me no good, her clear message of Brown being a whore to the unions is clear.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Monday, October 18, 2010
Week 3 October 18th
Another week of campaign ads for Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman, and this week both parties have two new ads, strangely (or un-strangely) neither features themselves in their own ad. No, Whitman and brown have made ads this week attacking each others positions; Whitman calling out Brown's pension deals, while Brown highlights Whitman's untruthfulness.
This week Jerry Brown put out two new TV ads both calling out Meg Whitman's untruthful behavior. The ad juxtaposes Whitman in front of a Polygraph meter as the narrator describes how Whitman has been untruthful on voting, her residency, and whether she knew of her housekeepers citizenship status. While the ad does throw a bit of mud at Whitman's credibility, the issues really doesn't matter a whole hell of a lot to voters and most likely wont change already made opinions. Brown's other new ad shows quotes from several California papers, most noticed of which being San Jose's Mercury, describing Whitman's inability to be Governor. The ad begins with a line from the Mercury claiming Whitman has a, " loose relationship with the truth." The narrator explains this quote and others like, " she utterly lacks the qualifications for being governor.", show Whitman is not right for the job. The ad then switches to positive quotes from papers endorsing Jerry Brown, claiming that Brown has the backing from papers across the state, while Whitman doesn't.
This week Meg Whitman flexed her spending power, blasting Jerry Brown with two new television ads; one attacking Brown's involvement with union, the other letting Police attack Brown on Whitman's behalf. Whitman's new, expensive-looking TV ad uses a fictional retirement planning magazine to jab at Brown's involvement with higher union pensions. The narrator tells viewers that they too could retire at age 55 if they worked for a the state, because Brown gave state employee unions more bargaining power, allowing them to retire early on a tax payer paid pension. Whitman's ad is trying to anger voters about wasteful spending, and her ads magazine-style makes for a powerful, eye catching advertisement.
Whitman's other ad, featuring several disappointed-looking police officers telling voters about "the real" Jerry Brown. The ad is weak, and doesn't adress very strong or relevant issues to voters. statements like: " a Supreme court judge that Brown once appointed...voted to stop the death penalty 64 times." has almost nothing to do with anything.
While I really liked Whitman's Pension magazine ad, her police advertisement was so off, that I'll give this weeks win for Jerry Brown. While Brown's polygraph test was just as lame as the police advertisement, his newspaper endorsement ad shows voters Brown has more support and know-how to be governor than Whitman.
This week Jerry Brown put out two new TV ads both calling out Meg Whitman's untruthful behavior. The ad juxtaposes Whitman in front of a Polygraph meter as the narrator describes how Whitman has been untruthful on voting, her residency, and whether she knew of her housekeepers citizenship status. While the ad does throw a bit of mud at Whitman's credibility, the issues really doesn't matter a whole hell of a lot to voters and most likely wont change already made opinions. Brown's other new ad shows quotes from several California papers, most noticed of which being San Jose's Mercury, describing Whitman's inability to be Governor. The ad begins with a line from the Mercury claiming Whitman has a, " loose relationship with the truth." The narrator explains this quote and others like, " she utterly lacks the qualifications for being governor.", show Whitman is not right for the job. The ad then switches to positive quotes from papers endorsing Jerry Brown, claiming that Brown has the backing from papers across the state, while Whitman doesn't.
This week Meg Whitman flexed her spending power, blasting Jerry Brown with two new television ads; one attacking Brown's involvement with union, the other letting Police attack Brown on Whitman's behalf. Whitman's new, expensive-looking TV ad uses a fictional retirement planning magazine to jab at Brown's involvement with higher union pensions. The narrator tells viewers that they too could retire at age 55 if they worked for a the state, because Brown gave state employee unions more bargaining power, allowing them to retire early on a tax payer paid pension. Whitman's ad is trying to anger voters about wasteful spending, and her ads magazine-style makes for a powerful, eye catching advertisement.
Whitman's other ad, featuring several disappointed-looking police officers telling voters about "the real" Jerry Brown. The ad is weak, and doesn't adress very strong or relevant issues to voters. statements like: " a Supreme court judge that Brown once appointed...voted to stop the death penalty 64 times." has almost nothing to do with anything.
While I really liked Whitman's Pension magazine ad, her police advertisement was so off, that I'll give this weeks win for Jerry Brown. While Brown's polygraph test was just as lame as the police advertisement, his newspaper endorsement ad shows voters Brown has more support and know-how to be governor than Whitman.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Week 2 October 11th
Baseball playoffs are here, but while many Californians are cheering on their SF Giants, we're not seeing much ads from either Meg Whitman or Jerry Brown. For this past week, only one new ad appeared for either candidate, and the message was taxes.
Whitman's new ad this week asks voters to remember taxes previously proposed or executed by Brown as governor and Mayor.
The ad uses a catchy whistling jingle as they blast Brown for continually finding ways to tax Californians, waring; we should hide our wallets from Jerry Brown.
Brown however has shot back, using this weeks ad to boast his positive record as previous Governor. Browns ad claims as Governor, he balanced the budget with no new taxes while creating 1.9 million jobs over his two terms. The ad also mentions Browns accomplishments as his current title, State Attorney General, such as investigating the Bell, CA scandal. The ad finishes by stating," Jerry Brown has independence as Governer to make tough decisions for California."
The two ads are really on opposite ends of the spectrum, Whitman's attack ad is well put together and speaks well to voters who are absolutely against new taxes. However, Whitman has yet to mention how she would fix the budget without taxes...kind of like making fat-free french fries. Brown has put out a resume in his ad, highlighting his long career as a California politician. Brown has previously been Mayor of Oakland, Governor two terms, and is currently the State Attorney General, and is banking on voters to favor his experience. This could backfire however, as there is a great deal of anti-incubent mindset among voters.
This weeks for Jerry, Whitman's tax ad is cute, but I think Brown has a more powerful message of experience, that should talk to voters tired of Whitman's negative ads.
Whitman's new ad this week asks voters to remember taxes previously proposed or executed by Brown as governor and Mayor.
The ad uses a catchy whistling jingle as they blast Brown for continually finding ways to tax Californians, waring; we should hide our wallets from Jerry Brown.
Brown however has shot back, using this weeks ad to boast his positive record as previous Governor. Browns ad claims as Governor, he balanced the budget with no new taxes while creating 1.9 million jobs over his two terms. The ad also mentions Browns accomplishments as his current title, State Attorney General, such as investigating the Bell, CA scandal. The ad finishes by stating," Jerry Brown has independence as Governer to make tough decisions for California."
The two ads are really on opposite ends of the spectrum, Whitman's attack ad is well put together and speaks well to voters who are absolutely against new taxes. However, Whitman has yet to mention how she would fix the budget without taxes...kind of like making fat-free french fries. Brown has put out a resume in his ad, highlighting his long career as a California politician. Brown has previously been Mayor of Oakland, Governor two terms, and is currently the State Attorney General, and is banking on voters to favor his experience. This could backfire however, as there is a great deal of anti-incubent mindset among voters.
This weeks for Jerry, Whitman's tax ad is cute, but I think Brown has a more powerful message of experience, that should talk to voters tired of Whitman's negative ads.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Week 1 Ocober 4th
A week after their first debate and into the final campaign month, the race for California's governer has heated up.
After her infamously incorrect ad featuring former President Bill Clinton, and a slip in poll numbers, Meg Whitman's advertisments have moved from her usual attack ads, to promoting her economic plans for California. Meanwhile, Jerry Brown, who has been fairly quiet in the media until now, has began his own vicous attack ads on his opponet.
Meg Whitmans telivision ad for the week, portrays Whitman as a successful buisness leader who can bring her buisness stratagey to build new jobs. The very proffesionaly done ad features images of Whitman speaking in a facotry, on a farm, and with construction workers (blue-color jobs, a demographic she would desperatly need to gain support from) while the ad goes over different tax cuts and incentives that would bring new jobs to California.
While Whitmans single ad props up her former accomplishments and economic plan in a positive light, Brown has gone for highly negative ads. In his ad "Capital Gains", Whitman is portrayed as a greedy billionare who only wants to extend tax cuts to wealthy Californians like herself. Brown uses unflatering images of Whitman juxaposed with a falling red arrow, as the narrartor warns "Whitmans plan would rip a whole in the budget." Jerry Brown is then shown sitting around talking with young students as the narrator claims Brown supports students and wouldn't borrow from education budget to allow extened tax cuts, like Whitman would.
In another attack ad on oppent Meg Whitman, Brown claims Whitman served on the board of Goldman Sachs, where she profited miliions from insider trades, only to be sued for them back. The next image shows Whitman, with the Wal street sign in the background, as the barrator asks if California should really vote in someone with "corrupt" charecter. The work curropt is in larger font and bright red. It is obvious Brown wants voters to associated Whitman with big money and Wall street wealth, tapping into voter anger agaisnt Wall street.
I will have to give this week to Meg Whitman, as it's refreshing to see her back away from such negative campaining. While I don't agree much with her philosophys or economic plans, I would much rather see Brown promoting his ideas and alternatives rather than resort to attacking his opponet.
After her infamously incorrect ad featuring former President Bill Clinton, and a slip in poll numbers, Meg Whitman's advertisments have moved from her usual attack ads, to promoting her economic plans for California. Meanwhile, Jerry Brown, who has been fairly quiet in the media until now, has began his own vicous attack ads on his opponet.
Meg Whitmans telivision ad for the week, portrays Whitman as a successful buisness leader who can bring her buisness stratagey to build new jobs. The very proffesionaly done ad features images of Whitman speaking in a facotry, on a farm, and with construction workers (blue-color jobs, a demographic she would desperatly need to gain support from) while the ad goes over different tax cuts and incentives that would bring new jobs to California.
While Whitmans single ad props up her former accomplishments and economic plan in a positive light, Brown has gone for highly negative ads. In his ad "Capital Gains", Whitman is portrayed as a greedy billionare who only wants to extend tax cuts to wealthy Californians like herself. Brown uses unflatering images of Whitman juxaposed with a falling red arrow, as the narrartor warns "Whitmans plan would rip a whole in the budget." Jerry Brown is then shown sitting around talking with young students as the narrator claims Brown supports students and wouldn't borrow from education budget to allow extened tax cuts, like Whitman would.
In another attack ad on oppent Meg Whitman, Brown claims Whitman served on the board of Goldman Sachs, where she profited miliions from insider trades, only to be sued for them back. The next image shows Whitman, with the Wal street sign in the background, as the barrator asks if California should really vote in someone with "corrupt" charecter. The work curropt is in larger font and bright red. It is obvious Brown wants voters to associated Whitman with big money and Wall street wealth, tapping into voter anger agaisnt Wall street.
I will have to give this week to Meg Whitman, as it's refreshing to see her back away from such negative campaining. While I don't agree much with her philosophys or economic plans, I would much rather see Brown promoting his ideas and alternatives rather than resort to attacking his opponet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)