Super Bowl TV Ad. Possible?

[Xanax Nation]

What about it. Feasible or not?

Also, I read that Clint Eastwood is a libertarian. Should we fire off an e-mail asking for an endorsement?

[Danny Molina]

No.

It costs money to make the commercial and it costs $3 Million just to air it.

[Mani]

No.

It costs money to make the commercial and it costs $3 Million just to air it.

Too much money, and all the early primaries are over by then.

[ratsbew]

No.

It costs money to make the commercial and it costs $3 Million just to air it.

It cant cost very much to produce a political advertisement, buy yes the airing fees would be extreme. Money would be better spent on many more ads placed over a wider area.

[cradle2graveconservative]

John Stossel is also a Libertarian and frankly I would love to hear a comment from him on all this, if he already has please show me to it.

[jaumen]

possible, but probably not very practical... that's a lot of money that could probably be better spent.

[American]

We should be focused on groups like the NRA and other organizations that know damn well the a Ghouliani ticket would be a vote against gun ownership.

This isnt being realistic.

[austin356]

TOO much $$$.

The cost per viewer during The Superbowl is several times greater than typical programming. We would be better off running ads during each of the big 3 evening news cast for 2 weeks straight, which would add up to the same number of eyes viewed (some will view more than once).

[Xanax Nation]

I am saying after we do well in the early primaries. there are roughly 20 primaries/caucuses immediately after superbowl sunday. That's all.

[LibertyEagle]

We should be focused on groups like the NRA and other organizations that know damn well the a Ghouliani ticket would be a vote against gun ownership..

Good idea. At one point in time, we talked briefly about putting ads in one or more of the top gun magazines. What do you guys think about doing that now and if so, which ones should we check out?

[Xanax Nation]

Good idea. At one point in time, we talked briefly about putting ads in one or more of the top gun magazines. What do you guys think about doing that now and if so, which ones should we check out?

Soldier of Fortune :D

[maxmerkel]

@superbowl : total waste of money
@soldier of fortune : lol

[Xanax Nation]

@superbowl : total waste of money
@soldier of fortune : lol


SB a no go, alright. SOF (I was kidding !!!!)

What are we talking here, mags like Outdoor Life, Field and Stream and Guns and Ammo?

[Sematary]

What about it. Feasible or not?

Also, I read that Clint Eastwood is a libertarian. Should we fire off an e-mail asking for an endorsement?

not.
Several reasons
1. Cost
2. Timing - I'm willing to bet the commercials are already made and ready to air.

[FluxCapacitor]

Indeed the cost and the timing wouldn't be right.

What Ron Paul needs are "Superbowl style" ads. He needs ads that are creative and interesting. Ads that inspire people to talk about them by the water cooler at work the next day. Ads that generate buzz, that go up on YouTube and get looked at time after time after time.

It doesn't cost much money to write an interesting ad. It takes one person. A smart, creative, witty, dedicated person. I'm sure the campaign can find someone like that. Maybe one of the 38,000 people who donated yesterday will have an idea.

I've been to Superbowl parties. Half the people there are not interested in football. They wander around and make conversation while the game is on. But when a commercial break hits... everyone watches. And then the next day there are websites devoted to watching and rating and commenting on the Superbowl ads. Just do a web search for Superbowl ads, you'll see. People are starved for something new and interesting. They're sick of "Buy XYZ Product! You'll like it." Especially in politics. This is 2007; we have the technology.

Start brainstorming, folks!