PDA

View Full Version : Enough About The G-d Commercial!




TVMH
10-27-2007, 11:34 PM
HQ is aware of the feelings of those that are bothered by the 30-second clip on Youtube.

And unless any of you have done any market research in NH, then I suspect you know less about making commercials for a limited NH TV market than does campaign HQ.

I propose that the best thing to do is let new threads about this commercial die without response.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST.

Kregener
10-27-2007, 11:41 PM
I second THAT.

goRPaul
10-27-2007, 11:51 PM
It's easy to get ahead of ourselves, but we supporters have to understand, we aren't smarter than the people who work for the campaign. They're doing superb jobs, better than any of us can do. They can always use some input, but be respectful.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 12:03 AM
I'll go ahead and respond since you guys decided to ignore my instructions. :D

I like the commercial...the subtle beauty lies in the fact that it is, indeed, amateurish.

For better or worse, glitz and glamour is not Dr. Paul's style, and I would bet that NH folks are able to spot bullshit when they see it.

And regarding the attacks on Malkin's site, they aren't doing themselves any favors by insulting people who have genuine beliefs. If anything, the blowback from the insults that you see over there will inspire people to work harder.

They, like many folks on FreeRepublic, come across as condescending, spiteful, and vindictive.

Look at it this way: how many close friends do you have that are openly condescending, spiteful, and vindictive towards you? I'll bet none...because no one wants friends that are condescending, spiteful, and vindictive.

I suggest that we all do our thing, and let others do their thing.

Do you 20-somethings want Ron Paul or someone else his age compiling a video and picking the theme music? Say something from the Glenn Miller band?

Likewise, do you 40,50-somethings want to hear a constant stream of music that you may not particularly enjoy?

We should all focus on our particular arena of influence and let others do the same.

Taco John
10-28-2007, 12:05 AM
The ad screams second tier candidate. Sorry... It just does.

We're giving ammunition to the enemy with this ad.

Karsten
10-28-2007, 12:07 AM
The ad screams second tier candidate. Sorry... It just does.

We're giving ammunition to the enemy with this ad.

I like the ad. I agree that there's subtle beauty in it. He comes across as a friend that everybody can like.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 12:19 AM
The ad screams second tier candidate. Sorry... It just does.

We're giving ammunition to the enemy with this ad.

Ammunition for what? To ridicule us even further? They are going to do that anyway, regardless of the production quality of the TV commercials.

These were real people talking about real concerns...if they were all from NH, all the better (I know at least one was, judging by his accent).

Now, if RP starts running NH commercials in Alabama, then we may have a problem, but I'm willing to give HQ the benefit of the doubt until they absolutely prove themselves undeserving of such.

Taco John
10-28-2007, 12:40 AM
Ammunition for what? To ridicule us even further? They are going to do that anyway, regardless of the production quality of the TV commercials.


Yeah, only now they have proof...

TVMH
10-28-2007, 01:13 AM
Yeah, only now they have proof...

Proof of what? That HQ produced an amateurish commercial for NH viewers?

So what? And how do you know that this amateurish commercial will not be as effective as a big-budget production would be? Would you rather HQ spend a couple of million dollars on a single ad that will only air in NH? And do you not believe that HQ conducted at least a little bit of market research before making this commercial?

Besides, when has the truth ever mattered to the MSM?

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:27 AM
TVMH wrote:


For better or worse, glitz and glamour is not Dr. Paul's style, and I would bet that NH folks are able to spot bullshit when they see it.

I just watched it for the third time, and I'm here in NH, and I've spotted bullshit, and after trying my best to be fair, that ad was it.

I'm not looking for glitz nor glamor, and certainly millions don't need to be spent.

There are 100 "homemade" youtube spots that could be condensed down to a 30 second spot that would have come out a 1000 times better than this dog's breakfast of an ad.

I've used these myself to convert quite a few people to the message, this thing does...well, nothing.

For God's sake, and I hope HQ is reading these comments in the morning, please don't run that mess, it'll go over like a turd in a punch bowl.

d'anconia
10-28-2007, 01:31 AM
Proof of what? That HQ produced an amateurish commercial for NH viewers?

So what? And how do you know that this amateurish commercial will not be as effective as a big-budget production would be? Would you rather HQ spend a couple of million dollars on a single ad that will only air in NH? And do you not believe that HQ conducted at least a little bit of market research before making this commercial?

Besides, when has the truth ever mattered to the MSM?

To be quite honest NO they probably didn't do their research. They have failed miserably during this whole campaign to work on such simple things as RP's body language, his clothing choice, and all appearance-related issues. You can harp as much as you want about the "subtle beauty" but there's nothing beautiful about people memorizing canned lines and speaking like damned robots. The whole reason many of us like Ron Paul is that he DOESN'T use canned lines.

If you ask me the last two months or so have convinced me that we have a bunch of amateurs in the campaign and the campaign was never expecting to get big so they picked their staff accordingly. Well now we're a lot bigger than they ever expected so it's time for them to actually step up to the occasion.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:33 AM
15 seconds of searching found this one.

30 second spot, professional, much much better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvzUiOtaFr0&NR=1

d'anconia
10-28-2007, 01:33 AM
Out of curiosity what HAS the campaign said about the ad?

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:35 AM
d'anconia wrote:


If you ask me the last two months or so have convinced me that we have a bunch of amateurs in the campaign and the campaign was never expecting to get big so they picked their staff accordingly. Well now we're a lot bigger than they ever expected so it's time for them to actually step up to the occasion.

Probably.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 01:38 AM
Out of curiosity what HAS the campaign said about the ad?

The only thing that I'm aware of is their request for the critics to cease and desist.

And I have a few questions for you guys:

1) How old are you?

2) Do your parents/grandparents spend as much time on Youtube as you do? (mine don't)

3) Do you understand all of the steps that are involved in producing a television commercial?

4) Were the Youtube videos you are referencing produced using television quality equipment or consumer-market electronics?

I understand that we each have our own preferences, but in the interest of maximizing our efficiency with regard to that concept, we should all focus our attention on our own arenas of influence.

dmspilot00
10-28-2007, 01:41 AM
Market research has nothing to do with it. The ad is just ridiculously amateurish looking, a trait that isn't perceived differently depending on the audience. This has nothing to do with being internet savvy or watching videos on YouTube. It has to do with decades of experience watching commercials on TV and being able to tell good from bad.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:48 AM
TVMH wrote:


And I have a few questions for you guys:

1) How old are you?

2) Do your parents/grandparents spend as much time on Youtube as you do? (mine don't)

3) Do you understand all of the steps that are involved in producing a television commercial?

4) Were the Youtube videos you are referencing produced using television quality equipment or consumer-market electronics?

I'm 42.

My grandparents are dead, my parents had broadband internet access for three years before I did, they are now 64 and 62.

Yes, my wife had a video production business.

Makes no difference, the spots could be "cleaned up" or re-shot using high grade production equipment in day, probably for very little cost.

This spot is a disaster.

TooConservative
10-28-2007, 01:49 AM
Too bad we have so many negative folks here.

One introductory TV ad doesn't make us or break us. It's our candidate and message that will win or lose for us in NH.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:54 AM
Shit...

Thirty seconds of:

Meet Ron Paul, the only real republican

Scroll his record...

Overlaid with stills of some of his rallies that are clearly in NH and show hundreds of committed and passionate supporters.

I'm Ron Paul and I endorsed this message.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:56 AM
TC wrote:


It's our candidate and message that will win or lose for us in NH.

Exactly.

And the candidate is presented in a ghastly manner, with the message missing.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 01:58 AM
And I'm not "being negative" but the fact is, time is running out.

We don't need to waste time recovering from a bad ad, when a good one could be done quickly and easily.

ForLibertyFight
10-28-2007, 01:59 AM
youtube link to the ad?

TVMH
10-28-2007, 01:59 AM
TVMH wrote:



I'm 42.

Well, you've got seven years on me. :)



My grandparents are dead, my parents had broadband internet access for three years before I did, they are now 64 and 62.

I hope your grandparents were able to lead full lives.

Also, I would assume that your parents have seen some of the youtube videos, so I'm guessing that won't really care much either way about the quality of the commercial.



Yes, my wife had a video production business.

Great! Maybe you could get her to shoot a commercial for free so the campaign could save some money. You should bring that up at your next Meet-up group. I know that's what I would do if I had a video production business. ;)



Makes no difference, the spots could be "cleaned up" or re-shot using high grade production equipment in day, probably for very little cost.

Less cost will be good for your wife's business finances. :D



This spot is a disaster.
I still think it is geared to a specific demographic that doesn't have much exposure to Youtube, and in that regard, calling it a "disaster" is a bit much.

EDIT: I just noticed that you said your wife "had" a business. Never mind about the Meet-up. You are now free to resume complaining. :D

d'anconia
10-28-2007, 02:02 AM
The only thing that I'm aware of is their request for the critics to cease and desist.

And I have a few questions for you guys:

1) How old are you?

2) Do your parents/grandparents spend as much time on Youtube as you do? (mine don't)

3) Do you understand all of the steps that are involved in producing a television commercial?

4) Were the Youtube videos you are referencing produced using television quality equipment or consumer-market electronics?

I understand that we each have our own preferences, but in the interest of maximizing our efficiency with regard to that concept, we should all focus our attention on our own arenas of influence.

Well I'm just glad the campaign got the message. I know it's only one of five but that just makes me worry even more about the next four to be honest.

I'm 21, parents and grandparents don't spend as much time as me on YouTube but I know both my parents would probably laugh if they saw that ad. Do I understand all the steps going into a TV ad? I'm not sure specifically what you mean but I took the time to make a decent ad for that Hardball TV Ad contest and I had no previous experience and wasn't getting paid to do it. I also didn't have any professional equipment either.

Sure it could convince older voters to support RP but there's no reason for it to be of the nature that it will be almost completely ineffective for other demographics. What's so hard about making one that's good for just about all ages? It's not like an old couple would see an ad where it looked candid and say "oh hey these people look too honest I'm not gonna vote for this guy".

The campaign doesn't seem to be paying much attention to detail when some of these small details could be taken care of very easily and help out the campaign even more. His grassroots support is working their butts off while his official campaign staff don't seem to be matching our efforts.

I mean have you guys seen Mitt Romney's ads? They look good AND they would work for the older generation(s)...

Listen, I know you don't want to hear any complaining but I don't see anything wrong with discussing this sort of stuff. I'm just saying there's no reason to have it supposedly geared for one age group while at the same time turning off a different age group.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 02:05 AM
We would, all the video stuff was sold over ten years ago.

And I understand the "non-computer" demographic angle, but honestly, I've viewed it four times now, keeping that in mind, and it just keeps getting worse.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 02:08 AM
15 seconds of searching found this one.

30 second spot, professional, much much better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvzUiOtaFr0&NR=1

I personally cannot stand this version of the ad. The screeching kid saying Conshtutushun, is horrible.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 02:10 AM
Well I'm just glad the campaign got the message. I know it's only one of five but that just makes me worry even more about the next four to be honest.

It would have been hard for them to have not. I mean, there have been probably 20 different thread started here, not to mention all the rude comments on YouTube.

I am embarrassed. Not of the ad, but of the so-called supporters' behavior.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 02:10 AM
Romney's ads are good, very slick and I'm sure the Ghoul's will be as well.

We don't need slick, we need the message, presented in a positive, NH centric light.

Simple, cheap, effective.

C'mon, we got more degrees than a thermometer within this campaign, both "official" and grassroots.

Someone could come up with something better.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 02:12 AM
Well I'm just glad the campaign got the message. I know it's only one of five but that just makes me worry even more about the next four to be honest.

I'm 21, parents and grandparents don't spend as much time as me on YouTube but I know both my parents would probably laugh if they saw that ad. Do I understand all the steps going into a TV ad? I'm not sure specifically what you mean but I took the time to make a decent ad for that Hardball TV Ad contest and I had no previous experience and wasn't getting paid to do it. I also didn't have any professional equipment either.

My point is that a Youtube video would not make for a high-quality television feed.



Sure it could convince older voters to support RP but there's no reason for it to be of the nature that it will be almost completely ineffective for other demographics. What's so hard about making one that's good for just about all ages? It's not like an old couple would see an ad where it looked candid and say "oh hey these people look too honest I'm not gonna vote for this guy".

People are not going to make up their mind after watching a commercial. They are going to watch it, file that information away, and remember the name "Ron Paul" when they hear the words "constitution" and "liberty".

I would challenge anyone to measure the effectiveness of the commercial with regard to name recognition against a Romney commercial. I would bet money that two weeks after viewing the commercial that no viewer could very accurately explain Romney's position on critical issues.



The campaign doesn't seem to be paying much attention to detail when some of these small details could be taken care of very easily and help out the campaign even more. His grassroots support is working their butts off while his official campaign staff don't seem to be matching our efforts.

I would be very careful with this kind of criticism of campaign HQ. Them thar jest mite be fightin' words in Texas. :D



I mean have you guys seen Mitt Romney's ads? They look good AND they would work for the older generation(s)...

This is addressed above. Remember, this is a battle over ideology not a beauty contest.

You guys seem to want Dr. Paul to be "cool". Well, the fact is, by modern standards, he is NOT cool. In fact, I think he's kinda dorky sometimes..but I find that to be an endearing trait, because I'm dorky sometimes, myself...just ask my wife and two daughters.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 02:12 AM
Shit...

Thirty seconds of:

Meet Ron Paul, the only real republican

Scroll his record...

Overlaid with stills of some of his rallies that are clearly in NH and show hundreds of committed and passionate supporters.

I'm Ron Paul and I endorsed this message.

Scrolling text on a screen is not read. ie. what you are suggesting, is not effective. Not at all.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 02:13 AM
We would, all the video stuff was sold over ten years ago.

And I understand the "non-computer" demographic angle, but honestly, I've viewed it four times now, keeping that in mind, and it just keeps getting worse.
I edited my OP...I misread "had" as "has". :o

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 02:20 AM
Scrolling text on a screen is not read. ie. what you are suggesting, is not effective. Not at all.


I'm not a video producer, nor a campaign manager.

But I'm here on the ground in NH, I know what my neighbors think, I've been involved in quite a few political battles here, and I'm in a line of work that requires the transmission of information to other people quickly, and in a concise manner.

And I know crap when I see it, and that's what this ad is, after viewing it five times now.

Run that ad, and it will go a long way towards making the laughing stock RP is supposed to be, at least according to the MSM and the punditocracy.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 02:21 AM
It would have been hard for them to have not. I mean, there have been probably 20 different thread started here, not to mention all the rude comments on YouTube.

I am embarrassed. Not of the ad, but of the so-called supporters' behavior.

Bear in mind that there is a whole generation of voters that have "come of age" on the internet where one can say whatever one wants in relative anonymity.

I don't entirely blame young people for their behavior...I blame their parents! :p

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 02:26 AM
TVMH wrote:


I edited my OP...I misread "had" as "has".

I read your updated reply.

And I'm done complaining, I've got overpass waves to do tomorrow.

But that spot still sux.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 02:27 AM
I'm not a video producer, nor a campaign manager.

But I'm here on the ground in NH, I know what my neighbors think, I've been involved in quite a few political battles here, and I'm in a line of work that requires the transmission of information to other people quickly, and in a concise manner.

And I know crap when I see it, and that's what this ad is, after viewing it five times now.

Run that ad, and it will go a long way towards making the laughing stock RP is supposed to be, at least according to the MSM and the punditocracy.

But don't you understand that we are already the laughing stock? We have been since the campaign started.

This is a limited market ad.

Maybe it's even a reverse-marketing ploy...show an amateurish video, generate a buzz, get made fun of nationwide as we already have been doing...and what is happening during all of this? :cool:

People are hearing the name "Ron Paul".

It's one ad. HQ is aware of our feelings toward it. We could go on and on debating the virtues and vices of this single ad, but I'd rather not. :)

fj45lvr
10-28-2007, 02:39 AM
Help them see that this "supposed" tv commercial is TERRIBLE.

I cannot for the life of me think how anyone could actually believe this thing would be positive unless they believe the audience is some how brain-damaged to degree.

This is VERY important, MARKETING, what this portrays to people in my opinion is that Paul has to get ACTORS (bad ones at that) to speak out a script which could be a script for ANY politician. Paul is better than that because he is not just "any politician"......

Please, if there are "ears to hear" let them know that this will NOT work to endear people to anything let alone find "hope for America".....let's actually hear something from Paul himself or quotes from our fore fathers over OBVIOUSLY scripted "compliments" by what looks like poor actors.

This is the whole shebang and MARKET COMPETITION should prevail....FREE markets should BRING the "best" and "innovation" and this is waaaayyyyy below even average.

I am sorry if this hurts somenone's pride or discretion but honestly this gives me a NEGATIVE feeling towards the candidate if I didn't know Paul from Adam (which is his situation precisely).

Dear LORD save us. Amen.

Razmear
10-28-2007, 02:50 AM
Well I think the ad is fine as an intro to Ron Paul add in NH. It states his positions on many issues, and even tho it looks like an ad for The Money Store with the coffee shop endorsements I think it will do the job for those folks who are not on the web already looking up Ron Paul.

The only downside I see to the ad it that it only mentioned Ron's name 3 times. Some of the pronouns could have been replaced with Ron Pauls, but otherwise its a great first ad for New Hampshire. And yes I've seen most of the YouTube ads and although those who made the ads love em, the general public would be turned off by 95% of them.

eb

d'anconia
10-28-2007, 02:52 AM
Well I'm from Southern California and someone has informed me that New Hampshire is quite a bit different from the stuff that I'm used to so I hope they're right. Either way the campaign is fixing up the video so I guess they've heard us loud and clear and should be taking care of things.

I'm done complaining about this for now. Might as well hush up until the next version of it is released.

expatriot
10-28-2007, 02:56 AM
HQ is aware of the feelings of those that are bothered by the 30-second clip on Youtube.

And unless any of you have done any market research in NH, then I suspect you know less about making commercials for a limited NH TV market than does campaign HQ.

I propose that the best thing to do is let new threads about this commercial die without response.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST.

Look -
the discussion itself may be annoying, frightening, irritating, obnoxious, obsequious,
disappointing, absurd, maddening, enraging, embarrassing, unenlightened,
vapid, or any otherwise emotionally negative in any number of ways,
but this kind of discussion is vitally important to ferreting out the kernels of truth
and otherwise point out any feasible improvements in the whole issue.

I won't even mention my regard for the ad,
but I will make one observation:

If the ad is as bad as people have painted it up to be (maybe it is?)
then all we need to do is pay attention to what the opposition says and writes
about it to be able to pull off something far better in the next advert.
The free publicity will at least be worth it if the neocons start a buzz
based on the advert. And all the discussion on the board would then make for a
great reservoir of wisdom with which to improve it by orders of magnitude.

If the ad is as effective as the official staff who put it together calculated,
then there wil be a flood of new support beginning shortly (3-4 days) which will make
all the wailing and gnashing of teeth rather moot (I do hope so....)

Either way, we only need a few more hours to be able to discern whether
the ad is effective or forgettable.

(Yes, I realize time is short, but a steady nerve is necessary in these situations.:cool:)

Oops - them were two observations.
Aw, nevermind...

In conclusion,
What would Ron Paul say?
"Talk about it, discuss the issues, exercise diplomacy but there is simply no need
to attack critics who represent no real threat to the campaign."
(Or perhaps you wish to consult with attorneys to determine whether or not
to start a flame war with people whose only motivation is to help the campaign)

:D That was fun. Next ?

fj45lvr
10-28-2007, 03:18 AM
If the ad is as bad as people have painted it up to be (maybe it is?)
then all we need to do is pay attention to what the opposition says and writes
about it to be able to pull off something far better in the next advert.
The free publicity will at least be worth it if the neocons start a buzz
based on the advert. And all the discussion on the board would then make for a
great reservoir of wisdom with which to improve it by orders of magnitude.

If the ad is as effective as the official staff who put it together calculated,
then there wil be a flood of new support beginning shortly (3-4 days) which will make
all the wailing and gnashing of teeth rather moot (I do hope so....)

Either way, we only need a few more hours to be able to discern whether
the ad is effective or forgettable.

(Yes, I realize time is short, but a steady nerve is necessary in these situations.:cool:)

?


We don't have the luxury of using poor ads as attempts to get better IMHO we have little time and we have to "come from behind". Paul is a phenominal Congressmen and I think he deserves a better vehicle to communicate to the people that he wants to restore the republic and LIBERTY.

1) if this poor ad is what our donations are being used for you can expect them to slow down.....brutally honest there.....we are giving to WIN. Must do better than this to win.

2) Nothing about Paul should ever appear "phony"


If avorath or other total amateurs can make a top quality you tube ad with no prior experience then where does that leave the campaign with this "fake" ad???

Nash
10-28-2007, 06:17 AM
If avorath or other total amateurs can make a top quality you tube ad with no prior experience then where does that leave the campaign with this "fake" ad???

I love aravoth's video's but they are not "ads" they are videos and there are differences.

Videos are for a captive audience, they use copyrighted music and they are lengthy.

Ads are for people flipping through commercials and spacing out in front of the television set.

Yes this ad is cheesy but it's specifically targeting NH and the style of it suggests the people who made it had this audience in mind. Creating some expensive high production value ad that blows the whole campaign kitty is ridiculous. Using low budget makes the message go farther.

TV ads are not for us. They are for people who watch television in the middle of the day and the 6 o' clock news. People who use the net and watch youtube have already made their decision about Ron Paul, people who are being targeted by these ads don't use the net and don't know what youtube is.

I'm not saying the ad is a masterpiece or deserves an award, but it's not "horrible" either. Would you prefer that RP try to integrate fox news debate coverage into his ads and then get sued like McCain?

alicegardener
10-28-2007, 06:23 AM
Amateurish? The ad looks like it was made by incompetent professionals and the actors don't look like real people being interviewed, they look like incompetent actors. Im sorry, this ad is painfully embarrassing to watch. I regret whatever portion of my donation went into making it.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 06:43 AM
I would like them to redo the ad too. However, you seem confused about the difference between YouTube videos and TV commercials. YouTubers frequently use copyrighted footage and music in their videos. Including the one you mentioned. While we can get away with it on YouTube, we cannot in TV commercials. You also need to look at the length of these things. A lot of the Youtube videos are close to 10 minutes long. We have a whole 27 SECONDS for this TV commercial.

Since the commercial was released for us to check out, there have been all kinds of people on this board saying how they could do better. Some stated they had a background in this stuff. Well, why the hell don't they stand up and offer their services, FREE of course, to the campaign? Why in hell haven't they done it before now? Now is our chance.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 06:49 AM
Why doesn't Ron Paul stage a Mitt Romney style online competition to get the supporters to create the best 30-second spot? The quality would be leaps and bounds better than the one they posted to YouTube today, and it would save them all the money of producing and shooting a "professional" ad.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 06:51 AM
Why doesn't Ron Paul stage a Mitt Romney style online competition to get the supporters to create the best 30-second spot? The quality would be leaps and bounds better than the one they posted to YouTube today, and it would save them all the money of producing and shooting a "professional" ad.

It is a good idea and one that was brought up last night. No one has to wait around for the campaign's approval. JUST DO IT! Even if the campaign doesn't end up using them, we can at the grassroots level. In fact, we are needing good quality TV ads RIGHT NOW! www.operationnh.com

jaumen
10-28-2007, 06:56 AM
HQ is aware of the feelings of those that are bothered by the 30-second clip on Youtube.

And unless any of you have done any market research in NH, then I suspect you know less about making commercials for a limited NH TV market than does campaign HQ.

I propose that the best thing to do is let new threads about this commercial die without response.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST.

Unless people in New Hampshire like it when people recite clearly scripted lines at them, and amateurly shot video, I fail to see how this would go over better in New Hampshire than in the rest of the United States.

jaumen
10-28-2007, 07:00 AM
I love aravoth's video's but they are not "ads" they are videos and there are differences.

Videos are for a captive audience, they use copyrighted music and they are lengthy.

Ads are for people flipping through commercials and spacing out in front of the television set.

Yes this ad is cheesy but it's specifically targeting NH and the style of it suggests the people who made it had this audience in mind. Creating some expensive high production value ad that blows the whole campaign kitty is ridiculous. Using low budget makes the message go farther.

TV ads are not for us. They are for people who watch television in the middle of the day and the 6 o' clock news. People who use the net and watch youtube have already made their decision about Ron Paul, people who are being targeted by these ads don't use the net and don't know what youtube is.

I'm not saying the ad is a masterpiece or deserves an award, but it's not "horrible" either. Would you prefer that RP try to integrate fox news debate coverage into his ads and then get sued like McCain?

No, but I'd prefer that the people in his commercials either be much better at reading scripted lines, or just be allowed to say something in their own words, so they don't have to TRY to act. That's the worst part. I can live with the other amateurishness.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 07:00 AM
It is a good idea and one that was brought up last night. No one has to wait around for the campaign's approval. JUST DO IT! Even if the campaign doesn't end up using them, we can at the grassroots level. In fact, we are needing good quality TV ads RIGHT NOW! www.operationnh.com

Those ads on that operationnh.com site are incredible! Those are the kind of ads Ron Paul needs to run. Ads that hit the right points and that don't have a distractingly amateurish waxy feel that makes the viewer think more about the low quality of the ad than the message of the ad. Somebody hand over the rights to those ads for Dr. Paul to run them himself! Lol.

Brian
10-28-2007, 07:01 AM
I like the idea of the commercial. Keep it simple, and cover the bases. Relate to people. My thoughts as I watched it the first time, and most of this has been covered elsewhere:

What's up with the blue screen?
Ron looks pissed off.
Where did they get that cheesy music stock?
NH, the state of neatly trimmed beards.
You really do agree with Ron Paul? I believed you the first time.
These actors are horrible.
Do that many men in NH really look like serial killers?
Why is the women at :16 cocking her head like a chicken?
College kids don't talk like that.
Why did they show us the kids backsides at 0:22?
Don't portray him as catching on, portray him as caught on.

All this makes the commercial appear amateurish. Keep the idea, re-shoot the entire thing.

I apologize to the actors. I understand they are real supporters. I don't want to hurt feelings.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 07:11 AM
I like the idea of the commercial. Keep it simple, and cover the bases. Relate to people. My thoughts as I watched it the first time, and most of this has been covered elsewhere:

What's up with the blue screen?
Ron looks pissed off.
Where did they get that cheesy music stock?
NH, the state of neatly trimmed beards.
You really do agree with Ron Paul? I believed you the first time.
These actors are horrible.
Do that many men in NH really look like serial killers?
Why is the women at :16 cocking her head like a chicken?
College kids don't talk like that.
Why did they show us the kids backsides at 0:22?
Don't portray him as catching on, portray him as caught on.

All this makes the commercial appear amateurish. Keep the idea, re-shoot the entire thing.

I apologize to the actors. I understand they are real supporters. I don't want to hurt feelings.

I could live with the beards, sudden shots of peoples' backsides, pissed-looking Ron (why shouldn't Ron be pissed? He's the only person in Congress actually fulfilling his oath to uphold the Constitution), and even the cheesey music. Heck, Mitt uses even cheesier background music in his ads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fiXLymRkjU <-- Although I think it would be cool if Ron did something similar to this ad, where he just talked directly to the camera, and maybe as he hit the talking points, key words would kind of softly fade onto and off of the screen. The person of Ron Paul and his message is what attracted me, after all, not the fancy website.

They just need to focus more on the man and the message, that's all, and less on trying to prove that Ron's "catching on" with lots of people (I get it--bandwagon effect is what they're going for, but I think the man and the message would be far more effective at this point).

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 07:16 AM
To be quite honest NO they probably didn't do their research. They have failed miserably during this whole campaign to work on such simple things as RP's body language, his clothing choice, and all appearance-related issues. You can harp as much as you want about the "subtle beauty" but there's nothing beautiful about people memorizing canned lines and speaking like damned robots. The whole reason many of us like Ron Paul is that he DOESN'T use canned lines.

If you ask me the last two months or so have convinced me that we have a bunch of amateurs in the campaign and the campaign was never expecting to get big so they picked their staff accordingly. Well now we're a lot bigger than they ever expected so it's time for them to actually step up to the occasion.
Unfortunately I have to agree. :(

Such a great opportunity - everything in place - the best candidate, the grassroots activism, the money, the message: but yet it looks like the national campaign is going to BLOW IT BIG TIME. And this commercial is just another big indicator of that!

Please don't come on this forum trying to justify that piece of garbage commercial - with "they know what they are doing" - They obviously DON'T!

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 07:17 AM
Now, this is what Ron needs to do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7wjJyMDUH0

Ron just needs to talk to the camera (come on, he's a handsome guy) and give his message straightforward. Simple, refreshing, and to-the-point. Having second-rate actors read canned lines only dilutes that message.

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 07:30 AM
Has this advertisement already been run ANYWHERE in New Hampshire?

If not - what do we need to do to make sure it NEVER runs in ANY market?

It is not FIXABLE - They need to start over with a whole different ad!

LeFou
10-28-2007, 07:34 AM
An Idea:

Why not just let the grassroots creative remix the spot in their usual funky ways. A parody of the "Head On" commercial maybe:
"Ron Paul! Apply directly to the White House"
"Ron Paul! Apply directly to the White House"

And the usual techno & speed metal music remixes using clips from the ad. Yes it's corny; let's make a meme of it.

goldstandard
10-28-2007, 07:35 AM
I think the ad could be improved A LOT by some small changes:

- make Ron smile:)
- another background
- cut the "I don't agree with him all the time" and "...I really really do"
- cut the "pronto" woman
- redo the student part

positive:

- the people seem nice to me

I don't have any experience or knowledge regarding ads.:)

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 07:39 AM
I think the ad could be improved A LOT by some small changes:

- make Ron smile:)
- another background
- cut the "I don't agree with him all the time" and "...I really really do"
- cut the "pronto" woman
- redo the student part

positive:

- the people seem nice to me

I don't have any experience or knowledge regarding ads.:)

It would take more than that...

How about the fact that it looks like footage from the 1970s?

It's AWFUL!

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 07:59 AM
URGH! Damage control! Damage control!

http://race42008.com/2007/10/28/ron-paul-new-hampshire-ad/#comment-168539

The ad's already making its rounds on the big political blogs and it's getting BAD reviews and comments.... :(

Ozwest
10-28-2007, 08:14 AM
Is New Hampshire a far and distant Planet suspended in a time warp, caught between Mayberry and the Twighlite Zone? The "demographics" of this State must be very peculiar. Is Gomer Pyle still pumping Ethyl at the local Texaco Super Chief gas station? Is Aunt Bee still a registered Republican? Strange days indeed...

vauge
10-28-2007, 08:16 AM
The only thing that I'm aware of is their request for the critics to cease and desist.

And I have a few questions for you guys:

1) How old are you?

2) Do your parents/grandparents spend as much time on Youtube as you do? (mine don't)

3) Do you understand all of the steps that are involved in producing a television commercial?

4) Were the Youtube videos you are referencing produced using television quality equipment or consumer-market electronics?

I understand that we each have our own preferences, but in the interest of maximizing our efficiency with regard to that concept, we should all focus our attention on our own arenas of influence.
1) 35
2) Grandparents are passed
3) Nope.
4) I'll take message quality over *visual quality* any day.

I understand that this ad is bad. Simple as that.

TooConservative
10-28-2007, 08:16 AM
Via DailyPaul.com today:


I've seen lots of criticism of it around the net, but I think it is great, and here is why: Some people don't seem to like it, and think the ad should be more like the ones on the internet. But I'd like to remind everyone, that internet junkies are fundamentally different from people who get their news and information from TV. I'll admit that the ad seems kind of goofy to me, but then - I haven't watched TV regularly for the past 10 years! All ads seem stupid to me!

Remember, us internet junkies are the ones who got it a long time ago, while those watching TV may still not even have heard of Ron Paul. So remember, these ads are not targeted at us. The takeaway from this first ad is, "he's catching on." I think that is brilliant, and they should keep hitting it hard in the early part of the campaign - "he's catching on, he's catching on." This should be coordinated with radio spots that say the same thing - he's catching on.

In my MBA studies, I had a few classes in marketing and advertising. I'm sure that this ad is the first planned in a series, and they will build on this message. As I said, these ads are not intended to appeal to us, the internet nuts and keyboard jockeys, but to the couch potatoes who are used to watching (in my opinion) hours of inane programming.

Have you ever noticed that people who watch a lot of TV tend to repeat, nearly verbatim, what they hear on TV? This is how people who watch TV form their opinions. This is why I think the ad is great. It is upbeat, positive, and leaves a great message at the end. Now the next time people who don't know much about him get together and and the subject of Ron Paul comes up, they have something they can say and feel intelligent, because they heard it on TV.

Example:

Marge: I keep seeing all these home-made signs for Ron Paul all over town. What do you think of him?

Ed: Well, I don't always agree with him, but he's honest. I think he's catching on.

Marge: Well, that's for sure - he's catching on!

This is how TV becomes reality. Let's put a little faith and trust that the campaign knows what it is doing.

Michael Nystrom
Editor
www.dailypaul.com

- - - - -

Jane Aitken in New Hampshire, who is working closely with the campaign writes:

I have a request and that is that you stop calling the campaign with your complaints. I have offered to work with them on the critique. This is not set in stone, and can be redone. These are real supporters, not actors. I know most of them. Sure Ron could be smiling, and the script could be better. I am going to watch it carefully and send them my suggestions.

But please stop inundating Kent with phone calls and emails OK?
It would be appreciated.

Thanks...

goldstandard
10-28-2007, 08:18 AM
I think this is the message we need in this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 08:22 AM
I think this is the message we need in this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

Is that Fred Thompson? :O! I knew he was a former McCain supporter, but was he a Paul supporter at the time that video was shot too?

Ron Paul Fan
10-28-2007, 08:26 AM
So what's worse, Ron Paul's ad or Chris Dodd's Barbershop ad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVC0Ua8Id9w

"Hey it's Chris Dodd! We were just talking about ya..."

unklejman
10-28-2007, 08:31 AM
My biggest problem with the commercial was that it was obviously actors. Bad actors. I would have rather seen real people who support Ron Paul saying things.

stevedasbach
10-28-2007, 08:39 AM
What is the dumbest, most annoying ad on TV? For me, it's those ridiculous "Head On" ads.

I can't believe that anyone would buy that product based on those ads. However, given the frequency that they appear, and the multitude of ads for spin-off products using the same approach, I have to conclude that the ads are extremely effective. If they weren't, they wouldn't still be on the air.

Picture the investors at Head-On getting their first look at this advertising campaign. How do you think they felt? Did they think they could come up with a better ad? Did they think that these stupid ads would sink their product and wipe out their investment?

Someone noted that the new Ron Paul ad is very similar to ads he used to win his races for Congress. Maybe, just maybe, he knows what he's doing.

stevedasbach
10-28-2007, 08:41 AM
My biggest problem with the commercial was that it was obviously actors. Bad actors. I would have rather seen real people who support Ron Paul saying things.

It has been posted multiple times that these are NOT ACTORS. They are real Ron Paul supporters in New Hampshire.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 08:52 AM
It has been posted multiple times that these are NOT ACTORS. They are real Ron Paul supporters in New Hampshire.

If they were reading from a script, then they were acting. He needs to go to a real Ron Paul rally and just get some candid remarks.

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 08:58 AM
I have a request and that is that you stop calling the campaign with your complaints...

But please stop inundating Kent with phone calls and emails OK?
It would be appreciated.

Thanks...

If the campaign will issue a statement that the commercial will NEVER see the light of day on TV - then I'm almost sure that the complaints will cease.

I'm not talking about "fixing" that awful ad - I'm talking about the campaign letting the grassroots know they received the message and are starting over and doing this the right way!

Nothing short of that will satisfy me on this issue. I have worked too hard and given too much to see my contributions WASTED in this manner.

I really like the idea of the campaign having a contest amongst the grassroots for the best 30 second political advertisment...

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 09:03 AM
If the campaign will issue a statement that the commercial will NEVER see the light of day on TV - then I'm almost sure that the complaints will cease.

I'm not talking about "fixing" that awful ad - I'm talking about the campaign letting the grassroots know they received the message and are starting over and doing this the right way!

Nothing short of that will satisfy me on this issue. I have worked too hard and given too much to see my contributions WASTED in this manner.

I really like the idea of the campaign having a contest amongst the grassroots for the best 30 second political advertisment...

It'd probably look really bad if the campaign issued a statement saying "Whoops! What were we thinking? We just now realized the tv ad we made was horrible, so never mind that whole thing."

I say, they just quietly remove it from the website, do a better one, and then re-release it as the refurbished and revamped commercial that will actually air and explain that the old one that was posted was just a test example.

vauge
10-28-2007, 09:04 AM
If the campaign will issue a statement that the commercial will NEVER see the light of day on TV - then I'm almost sure that the complaints will cease.

I'm not talking about "fixing" that awful ad - I'm talking about the campaign letting the grassroots know they received the message and are starting over and doing this the right way!

Nothing short of that will satisfy me on this issue. I have worked too hard and given too much to see my contributions WASTED in this manner.
Indeed.

Henry
10-28-2007, 09:06 AM
I had my suspicions about the competency of the national campaign staff. In so far as Iím concerned, this ad just confirmed the later. What a shame for all the people that worked so hard for RP. We deserve a lot better!

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 09:13 AM
I say, they just quietly remove it from the website, do a better one, and then re-release it as the refurbished and revamped commercial that will actually air and explain that the old one that was posted was just a test example.
Ok - I could live with that as well.

I just don't want to hear any talk of "fixing" that ad - It is not "fixable".

A WHOLE NEW advertisement needs to be created. Whatever was spent on the original - just needs to be written off as a "lesson learned".

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 09:13 AM
I had my suspicions about the competency of the national campaign staff. In so far as Iím concerned, this ad just confirmed the later. What a shame for all the people that worked so hard for RP. We deserve a lot better!

I say, hand over all advertisement creation to the supporters -- let the free markets decide! Have everyone create their own ads, then have a big vote on which ad is the best to give the campaign some guidance, but then let Ron himself have the final say on what airs.

Jimmy
10-28-2007, 09:18 AM
Off Topic but...

What about an ad like this...Ron Paul simply talking to the American people...about what HE wants to do...

Ron Paul in a setting behind a desk, American flag in background.. (or whatever is deemed best setting for viewer)

RON PAUL ADDRESSING THE PEOPLE..(.looking the viewer squarely in the eyes..NO DISTRACTIONS..INTENSE... one on one with viewer)



Americans....I would like to have thirty seconds of your time.....

I am Ron Paul running for President...I want to....Insert... (His position on what is most important to NH voters or focus group)...(Some hard topics no one else will address directly...Immagration, IRS, His voting record....whatever would grab intended viewers)

And a small closing about bringing America back to its constitutional roots, freedom, liberty ...like the founders intended...



I would feel Ron Paul himself talking straight to the voters would be good stuff....He sells himself...and he could have time to practice and say EXACTLY what he wants to say...exactly the way he wants to say it. Simple..no money and good stuff

MozoVote
10-28-2007, 09:23 AM
So what's worse, Ron Paul's ad or Chris Dodd's Barbershop ad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVC0Ua8Id9w


Do you want an honest answer?

Really?

..

..

Dodd's ad is better. It's hokey, but cute. It's professional enough to watch without wincing. Dodd is relaxed enough to have a little fun with his image.

Henry
10-28-2007, 09:30 AM
Do you want an honest answer?

Really?

..

..

Dodd's ad is better. It's hokey, but cute. It's professional enough to watch without wincing. Dodd is relaxed enough to have a little fun with his image.


Itís a choice between the ridiculous and the absurd!! Hmmm?

TexMac
10-28-2007, 09:41 AM
The American Spectator's Jennifer Rubin has no love for Ron Paul, so I take this as an unbiased opinion of the new ad:


And the new Ron Paul ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30yxHqSUva8)-- appealing to the anti-war, anti-slick professional politician, anti- big government independent voters.

http://www.amspec.org/blogger.asp?BlogID=8917

If this were a bashable ad, they would have bashed it. Instead, they see it as appealing to just the voters it was targeted to attract.


anti-slick professional politician

Dorfsmith
10-28-2007, 09:51 AM
I watched the ad several times yesterday and several times today. I even lost sleep over it last night. Anyway, I have come to this conclusion. The ad is bad, very bad....but it's not the end of the world. It probably won't help much but I don't think it's powerful enough (in a bad way) to destroy him. When I first watched it I thought, oh no, he's done :D

mconder
10-28-2007, 09:51 AM
It's easy to get ahead of ourselves, but we supporters have to understand, we aren't smarter than the people who work for the campaign.

The fact that this video released is more than enough proof that some of us may be smarter than those working at HQ. I am honestly dumbfounded by the number of people defending the campaign and this video. If you people would stop defending it and let it go for what it is, people like me would stop bringing it up. I am willing to drop the issue, just as soon as people like you concede that this video sucked beyond words.

mconder
10-28-2007, 09:58 AM
I think this is the message we need in this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

People would want all sorts of things edited on this, but I think it genuine and would have far broader appeal because of this.

MozoVote
10-28-2007, 09:59 AM
I don't like some of the biting criticism (especially of the NH supporters who volunteered to be in the ad) but I agree with mconder that we need to call a spade a spade.

Too many people are rationalizing "Well, this ad isn't meant to conenct with the YouTube generation".

Wait a minute. Isn't that like the original criticism of RP's initial support? A bunch of "Internet People" that don't represent America?

There's a pretty good range of ages of viewers, that have commented on the ad. I think the Internet consenus (that it's not good enough) is spot on.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 10:06 AM
I don't like some of the biting criticism (especially of the NH supporters who volunteered to be in the ad) but I agree with mconder that we need to call a spade a spade.

Too many people are rationalizing "Well, this ad isn't meant to conenct with the YouTube generation".

Wait a minute. Isn't that like the original criticism of RP's original support? A bunch of "Internet People" that don't represent America?

There's a pretty good range of ages of viewers, that have commented on the ad. I think the Internet consenus (that is not good enough) is spot on.

The thing is, the acting is just SO BAD. I could probably live with the ad exactly as is with the only change being that the actors just talked normally and not used all kinds of weird inflections and put all the emphases on the wrong syllables.

Oh, and take out the "I really do" line. Then it would be tolerable.

LibertyEagle
10-28-2007, 10:07 AM
They are not actors; they are supporters.

The Dane
10-28-2007, 10:11 AM
The biggest problem is not even the bad acting (of the real supporters). The problem is that it allows negative points from the beginnig, like "I dont agree with all his views".
Like the potential voter should care about that this person dont agree with all his views. Truth is that RP views are close to a perfect match for alot of people, alot more than any of the so called front runners.

Plain weird that the campaing choose to paint such an underdog picture.

Why not hit it home hard from the beginning? RP certainly has the power to do that.

Edit: I agree that the "I really do" sounds lame.

But who knows, i guess this ad is targeting old folks. But how can they do that and in the same time show active supporters. Like old folks will go on the street??

JMann
10-28-2007, 10:12 AM
HQ is aware of the feelings of those that are bothered by the 30-second clip on Youtube.

And unless any of you have done any market research in NH, then I suspect you know less about making commercials for a limited NH TV market than does campaign HQ.

I propose that the best thing to do is let new threads about this commercial die without response.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST.

This was my second thought. My first thought while watching this was that it is awful. Then I read the second youtube comment where the guy said he knew several of the people in the add. This is NH folks not Cali, they probably like simple homespun ads. I'm sure there will be issue ads to follow. This is simply an brief introduction to people that don't know him. I count three mentions of his name and 4 visual images. I also felt he look and sounded presidential in his disclaimer at the beginning.

The Dane
10-28-2007, 10:20 AM
The commercial gives a bad first impression, and a better impression the more times one sees it.

But im afraid that those TV watchers in NH will not see it 3+ times.

Also i think that the production team lost track of the "first impression" of the ad, which is a normal error in creating music also.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 10:25 AM
Look, I'm sure Romney and the other campaigns have done plenty of market research in New Hampshire too, and their NH ads didn't make me nauseous. Okay, well they did make me nauseous, but for a completely different reason than this ad makes me nauseous. If this ad is based on market research, then they got some BAD market research, because none of the other well-funded candidates released this weird of commercials in NH.

fedup100
10-28-2007, 10:44 AM
The ad must be changed. But, beyond that, the Paul campaign must remember who their supporters are. This is a different campaign than most, the supporters are for the most part internet savvy.

I include myself in that group even though I am 60 years old. I do have high speed internet and a brain. My husband and I have owned major department stores and we have personally made, had made or signed off on television ads. I have owned real estate companies and done the same. Not all of us online are just 19 year olds.

The campaign should hire people that do nothing but monitor the forums and blogs for Ron Paul in order to keep the temperature of the supporters. These supporters are where their donations come from and a sloppy jop of ads at this critical time is a slap in the face of those people that have dug deep when there is little to give.

I fear that the handlers hired for this campaign are the same o same o, handlers that just do routine campaigns year after year. Paul needs to do better. Paul must also realize that when it comes to ads at this late date, saving your pennies will sink your ship.

Paul's campaign must kick into high gear, and do the unusual. There have been so many high quality videos made during this campaign, I am shocked that they would run this ad.....another could be strung together in less than a day that could really make an impact.

I hope there are no trolls working to bring down the campaign, but from what I know about this world and politics, I know they are there and in place.

aspiringconstitutionalist
10-28-2007, 10:53 AM
The campaign should hire people that do nothing but monitor the forums and blogs for Ron Paul in order to keep the temperature of the supporters.

Are you suggesting that a government official hire people to spy on us and keep tabs on everything we private citizens say? :eek: Big brother is watching......

jaumen
10-28-2007, 10:57 AM
So what's worse, Ron Paul's ad or Chris Dodd's Barbershop ad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVC0Ua8Id9w

"Hey it's Chris Dodd! We were just talking about ya..."

Also a bad commercial, but it's not AS bad... production quality is a whole lot better, though the actors are not. But at least in this case it is people who are acting are expected to have scripted lines, as it is sort of "telling a story" in the sense that it is a made up conversation in a barbershop, whereas in Ron Paul's ad it is just someone who one would expect to be a supporter telling the camera why they like Ron Paul. Which is good, IF the person saying it sounds like they MEAN what they're saying, and not just reading something. That is what makes it sounding scripted so much worse.


I think it's important to note, they could reshoot the same ad and have something worthwhile.... change the background at that one point, work on the overall quality, but most importantly, get honest comments from people in their own words, or at LEAST scripted comments from someone who can sound like they aren't reading a script (and doesn't bounce their head to emphasize words like the one lady). The basic concept of the ad is just fine, it's just the execution that was awful.

fedup100
10-28-2007, 11:19 AM
"Are you suggesting that a government official hire people to spy on us and keep tabs on everything we private citizens say? Big brother is watching......"

No. I am saying he needs a virtual presence within his own supporters where he can be fed needed information regarding his supporters. This is now possible with the internet. That would be far better than having millions of people blow his email out of the water.

To not be responsive to his very life blood of money is a vote killer. He has very talented supporters that could have done a bang up job as far as an ad and probably done so for free.

These forums are nothing more than polls, someone from his campaign needs to know how the natives are feeling about issues that affect his ability to be elected since they are paying for it.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 11:24 AM
Look -
the discussion itself may be annoying, frightening, irritating, obnoxious, obsequious,
disappointing, absurd, maddening, enraging, embarrassing, unenlightened,
vapid, or any otherwise emotionally negative in any number of ways,
but this kind of discussion is vitally important to ferreting out the kernels of truth
and otherwise point out any feasible improvements in the whole issue.

I won't even mention my regard for the ad,
but I will make one observation:

If the ad is as bad as people have painted it up to be (maybe it is?)
then all we need to do is pay attention to what the opposition says and writes
about it to be able to pull off something far better in the next advert.
The free publicity will at least be worth it if the neocons start a buzz
based on the advert. And all the discussion on the board would then make for a
great reservoir of wisdom with which to improve it by orders of magnitude.

If the ad is as effective as the official staff who put it together calculated,
then there wil be a flood of new support beginning shortly (3-4 days) which will make
all the wailing and gnashing of teeth rather moot (I do hope so....)

Either way, we only need a few more hours to be able to discern whether
the ad is effective or forgettable.

(Yes, I realize time is short, but a steady nerve is necessary in these situations.:cool:)

Oops - them were two observations.
Aw, nevermind...

In conclusion,
What would Ron Paul say?
"Talk about it, discuss the issues, exercise diplomacy but there is simply no need
to attack critics who represent no real threat to the campaign."
(Or perhaps you wish to consult with attorneys to determine whether or not
to start a flame war with people whose only motivation is to help the campaign)

:D That was fun. Next ?

Now this is a reasonable approach.

Constructive criticism is good, insulting the HQ of the campaign serves no useful purpose.

Anti Federalist
10-28-2007, 11:29 AM
I can settle the score on "actors" vs. "real people".

I know the fellow sitting on the porch with the white goatee beard, and he's not an actor.

If you're reading Art, this is no reflection on you, or on the rest of the people in the ad, but it's still bad.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 11:33 AM
Unfortunately I have to agree. :(

Such a great opportunity - everything in place - the best candidate, the grassroots activism, the money, the message: but yet it looks like the national campaign is going to BLOW IT BIG TIME. And this commercial is just another big indicator of that!

Please don't come on this forum trying to justify that piece of garbage commercial - with "they know what they are doing" - They obviously DON'T!

So now you are absolutely 100% certain that campaign HQ is incompetent?

Since you've asked others to not justify or support the actions of HQ, I will ask you to be quiet unless you have something constructive to offer (NOTE: Criticism can be constructive, but insults are not constructive in the least.)

Leslie Webb
10-28-2007, 11:45 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

Agree with mconder. You could even take the first thirty seconds of this YouTube and run it as an ad on the theme 'ordinary people support Ron Paul.' With Mr. van Doren in the YouTube we get the freedom message solid and whole cloth, and it comes across as more believable.

Part of the problem with the campaign ad is that it consists of snippets of one person's opinion, 'he wants to get us out of Iraq' pronto', and then on to the next person's snippet, 'cut government spending, ' the next person's 'protect personal privacy', etc. If the producers had taken one of the NH supporter/actors and had him or her speak for 25 seconds about why he or she liked Ron Paul the ad would probably have been better. There is too much jumping around in thirty seconds between eight different people, seven different issues and four different backdrops.

I did like the bearded man on the porch's New Hampshire accent. Put him on for thirty seconds.

TVMH
10-28-2007, 12:05 PM
Is New Hampshire a far and distant Planet suspended in a time warp, caught between Mayberry and the Twighlite Zone? The "demographics" of this State must be very peculiar. Is Gomer Pyle still pumping Ethyl at the local Texaco Super Chief gas station? Is Aunt Bee still a registered Republican? Strange days indeed...

You've obviously never been to New Hampshire...or Maine. :D

jabbott0
10-28-2007, 01:53 PM
We are here to win. Not to get 2nd place, or 3rd place. That commercial does a disservice to Ron Paul because he hardly speaks in it at all. The only time we do see him, he isn't smiling at all. There is no "Hope for America" if he doesn't show optimism (or at least realism) for the future. Then there's the non-committed person at the beginning -- if they are trying to paint his supporters as non-committed, that is exactly what they are going to get on election day. Simply put, this commercial doesn't have an "I can win" or an "I will win" attitude. The message of freedom needs to ring clear, but all we get from this commercial is a whimper.

By the way -- the second ad is out now! Much, much better!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay4vXZWxeuU

fj45lvr
10-28-2007, 05:14 PM
we are here to WIN WIN WIN WIN

We are in a WAR......

Put up the most LETHAL weapons in our arsenal.... chalk this up to a mistake and move forward.

There has to exist a means for these ads to have a "committee" to help sort them out so we utilize the GIFTS of the army to be the most effective.....I doubt that was the case, or we wouldn't see PHONY rhetoric in any ad for PAUL (who is the furtherest away from "phony".

Channing
10-28-2007, 05:23 PM
For a comparison of various TV ad videos (30 seconds) go here:
http://www.ronpaulpage.com/30second_commmercials.html

Then check out the poll at the bottom.

max
10-28-2007, 05:50 PM
but we supporters have to understand, we aren't smarter than the people who work for the campaign. They're doing superb jobs, better than any of us can do. .

thats the same line of thinking that has gotten this nation in such a mess...

deferring to the experts instead of thinking for ourselves. I agree with what Budda once said

"Believe nothing, even if it comes from me, if it is not consistent with your own common sense."

The ad screams "I'm a long shot, but I hope to "catch on" and be a top-tier guy one day.

Sorry, but the masses respect power and authority, and they vote like their betting on a horse race....not someone who concedes "i'm trying to catch on."

A better catch phrase would have been...'Ron Paul is gonna shock the political Establishment, I'm tellin ya"

And those kids should have been saying..

" Hey, did you hear about that Ron paul guy winning every post debate poll?"
"Yeah. It's amazing. He came out of nowhere and a lot of people are saying he's gonna win NH. I went to his website and really like what he hasd to say. I'm definitely voting for him"

JS4Pat
10-28-2007, 07:47 PM
So now you are absolutely 100% certain that campaign HQ is incompetent?

Since you've asked others to not justify or support the actions of HQ, I will ask you to be quiet unless you have something constructive to offer (NOTE: Criticism can be constructive, but insults are not constructive in the least.)

I'm not asking others to not justify or support the actions of HQ - In fact I'd appreciate hearing some type of REAL explanation for this blunder. I just asked that they not use the "they know what they are doing" defense. That aint gonna cut it on this one.

traviskicks
10-28-2007, 08:02 PM
HQ shouldn't even have to make a comercial... they could just ask their supporters to make 30 sec advertisements and pick the best one(s), the results would be much better and cheaper, IMO. This comercial was a joke, IMO, I hope not too much of our donated money went into putting that on. Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off with chipins... :)

kenc9
10-28-2007, 09:03 PM
I think this is the message we need in this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

This video edited into a Ron Paul TV ad is exactly what we need. No expense just the facts! That is a home run! :)

NinjaPirate
10-28-2007, 09:10 PM
Has anyone else noticed there is a slow down of subscribers for the 5th???

fj45lvr
10-28-2007, 11:06 PM
\
The ad screams "I'm a long shot, but I hope to "catch on" and be a top-tier guy one day.

Sorry, but the masses respect power and authority, and they vote like their betting on a horse race....not someone who concedes "i'm trying to catch on."

A better catch phrase would have been...'Ron Paul is gonna shock the political Establishment, I'm tellin ya"

And those kids should have been saying..

" Hey, did you hear about that Ron paul guy winning every post debate poll?"
"Yeah. It's amazing. He came out of nowhere and a lot of people are saying he's gonna win NH. I went to his website and really like what he hasd to say. I'm definitely voting for him"


Why exactly are we even considering "scripts" over REALITY??

I want FACT over FANTASY.....Truth over fiction......

Leave the "plastic" at the door.

Question_Authority
10-28-2007, 11:12 PM
Too bad we have so many negative folks here.

One introductory TV ad doesn't make us or break us. It's our candidate and message that will win or lose for us in NH.

Maybe so. And if the campaign had actually visited NH more than 6 times in the last 6 months, then maybe the people of NH would know more about our candidate and more about his message.

Instead he went to Wyoming today.

Ozwest
10-28-2007, 11:19 PM
Maybe so. And if the campaign had actually visited NH more than 6 times in the last 6 months, then maybe the people of NH would know more about our candidate and more about his message.

Instead he went to Wyoming today.

Wyoming is important. Soon, very soon, he will be spending a lot of time in New Hampshire.

goRPaul
10-28-2007, 11:28 PM
The ad rocks. It's perfect for NH. There are quotes in there that work- "I don't always agree with Paul, but he's honest," "He's a doctor, he knows about the healthcare mess," and my personal favorite, "He's catchin on, I'm tellin ya!"

The ad rocks because it works. I know it's tough to get past the cheese, but once you do, you realize it's perfect.

goRPaul
10-28-2007, 11:36 PM
There's so much more to the ad. The way they transpose from "He protects personal privacy, personal freedom" to the guy who says "Live free or die, New Hampshire," it's exactly what we need. Also, there are young people, possibly students, who are talking about switching to the republican and voting for RP.

I think people who hate the ad need to get over themselves. Calm down, and understand that nothing can bring down the campaign as bad as you're suggesting!

fj45lvr
10-29-2007, 12:06 AM
Real cheese VS. Fake cheese


you make the choice.

expatriot
10-29-2007, 12:06 AM
I think this is the message we need in this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LU_e5ezL-U

People would want all sorts of things edited on this, but I think it genuine and would have far broader appeal because of this.

This was from the IowaIndependent (http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=IowaIndependent) outlet.
They have released more than one excellent video for Ron Paul.
I second the motion.

Another outstanding example of supporters being interviewed is
Legalize Freedom - Vote Ron Paul! (by YouTube's DreamPipe (http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DreamPipe))
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOkv2IrbFG8
which is a bit long but full of emotionally honest and vibrant dialogue.

The key difference resides between supporters reading scripts which
they are trying to emotionally follow and the emotional and visual connect
that someone has when they are simply speaking in their own words
precisely what they mean.
The scripted 'reads' can never be as emotionally and visually honest
as a person saying what he or she truly believes in their own words.

The objection to 'using their own words' is overcome by simply doing more
takes (as done in Legalize Freedom above) and only using the bits
that strike a chord of resonance with issues.

Also, dressing up is passe, ordinary people respond to ordinarily dressed people,
and that means there needs to be a spectrum of dress-styles
rather than everyone looking like they are dressed for Friday night.:D