MyDD :: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Meme

Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Meme

by Jonathan Singer, Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 07:40:19 AM EST

Take a look:

I like it. It's light hearted -- the music is peppy, and it does not feel at all disjointed to see the transition from the hit to the "stand by your ad" requirement at the end with Obama smiling and laughing -- but it gets the message across that not only is McCain more of a celebrity candidate than Obama (see: Jake Tapper), but moreover the celebrity of his candidacy is much more insidious than that of Obama, with McCain's well-crafted image covering up his all-too-close relationships with Washington's special interests and powerful lobbyists.

In terms of language and imagery, the one main change that I would make is to have McCain not only flip-flopping from right to left, but instead from right to left and back to right -- because that's exactly been the trajectory of McCain's career, and the past few years in particular. It's not a major difference, but there's no need to reinforce the idea of McCain moving to the left, especially when it's the case that McCain has been moving, and continues to move to the right during the campaign.

But overall, this looks like an effective ad from the Obama campaign, one that I'm glad to see it running.

Tags: White House 2008, Barack Obama, John McCain, Ad Watch (all tags)

Permalink :: 35 Comments :: Post a Comment

Hmm, not sure if I want Obama mirroring McCain's (none / 0)

attacks, but at least the music is nice and upbeat and there aren't any lies.

by grass on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 07:59:58 AM EST

mirroring McCain (none / 0)

It's a response. And a much better one than Obama complaining that he's not a celebrity. It's brilliant to turn McBush's own attacks against him.

by Glaurung on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 08:27:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: mirroring McCain (none / 0)

Yeah, but I'd much rather Obama got the media and his surrogates to do this for him (however difficult that might be). McCain has nicely demonstrated how slippery the slope is once you start negative attack ads.

by grass on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 08:57:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: mirroring McCain (2.00 / 1)

Obama isn't attacking McSame. He's responding to multiple attacks on the subject of celebrity.

Better to just turn the table than whine about or try to disprove it

by Glaurung on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:20:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: mirroring McCain (none / 0)

McCain isn't losing because of negative ads. He's losing because he's a shitty leader.

Negative ads work. Bush's "slippery slope" slid him right into the White House in 2004. It's up to us if we want to win or lose this election.

by Covin on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:27:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I was thinking the same thing (none / 0)

I know we want him to answer McSame's attack ads but I to would like to see Obama stay above republican tactics.

by thenurse on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:42:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Any time they run film.... (none / 0)

...of McCain making out with Bush is fine by me.

The more, the better, in fact.

by Bush Bites on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:07:11 AM EST

About Time Obama Started Defining McCain! (none / 0)

More like this, please - and soon!

Obama's been able to handle the McCain campaign's efforts to define him. They've had some effect, but not enough to be a game-changer.

But it's vitally important that McCain not be allowed to define himself before our side defines him. Once he's established his identity in the public mind, it becomes a lot harder for us to change it.

Fortunately for us, McCain's made his campaign almost completely about Obama, so far, and hardly at all about himself. So there's still a decent bit of time, before the GOP convention, for Dems to define him before he does.

This ad is a good first step. More like it, and soon.

by RT on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:08:59 AM EST

not enough to be a game-changer. (none / 0)

What part of the game needs to be changed? Surely not Obama's leads in national and state polling.

by Glaurung on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:22:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not enough to be a game-changer. (none / 0)

Depends. If you're McCain, it sure needs to be changed. But his ads trying to define Obama didn't have that effect; that's what I was trying to say.

by RT on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 01:54:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm sorry but (none / 0)

I find this so depressing.

This has dissolved into the usual foolishness and Obama is just as guilty of it as McCain.

I really wish Obama would stand on stage had-to-head with McCain at least once a week from now until Election Day... townhalls, forums, debates, whatever.

Anything to actually keep this election about a contrast on THE ISSUES instead of all the millions spent on tit-for-tat politics, attack ads, responding attack ads etc.

Sorry but this ad sucks... it is gloating, says nothing positive about Obama. It is not a change, it is more of the same old garbage. It does not rise above the muck.

Carpe diem Obama. Please. Stand by your original promise to change the way Washington games are played. Show us that it doesn't have to be like this.

"Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been." Hillary Rodham Clinton - June 7, 2008

by twinmom on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:47:13 AM EST

Re: I'm sorry but (none / 0)

Fine but when he loses then what? Obama didn't go negative first and this is a response ad to McCain's attacks.

He is showing that McCain is the same old politics and I think he does so effectively.

Go ahead and mope but I would rather you mope, let OBama do what he needs to win rather than you having to mope for four more years of Bush.

by sweet potato pie on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:54:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Doing what he needs to win (none / 0)

In my opinion what Obama needs to do is to convince the majority of Americans that he is ready to be President and that his policies are better than McCain's.

That's why he should be jumping on chances to go head-to-head with McCain instead of allowing this to dissolve into a ridiculous discussion about who is the bigger celebrity.

Clearly... at this point Obama IS the bigger celebrity. No problem with that unless McCain can paint him as a celebrity with nothing substantive to back up all the hoopla. That is Obama's achilles heel and why McCain attacks are working... it isn't about fame, it is about a fame which seem disproportional to actual accomplishments, experience and gravitas. Even as a progressive Democrat (who will absolutely choose Obama over McCain) that aspect of Obama's candidacy does bug me.

That is why Obama must at every opportunity convey a command of the issues, a commitment to his platform, an ability to defend his positions with intellegence and deftness... not in a written book or with a teleprompter speech, but off-the-cuff and head-to-head.

He could do that by standing on the same stage as McCain. I do not understand why he isn't doing that? He should be hammering McCain with as many head-to-head interactions as possible. I can only believe that the contrast would help Obama (and the Democratic platform and agenda) tremendously? Yet we have not seen them together a single time. HUGE missed opportunity for Obama in my opinion.

"Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been." Hillary Rodham Clinton - June 7, 2008

by twinmom on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:05:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doing what he needs to win (none / 0)

What you want is for Obama to embrace the failed "don't fight back" strategy that serves us so well in 2004?

Forget it. I want to win. You don't change ANYTHING by losing.

Hey guys? You know we won right? You can stop the doooooomsaying now.

by JDF on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:40:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It IS possible to (none / 0)

Fight back by using intelligence, command of the issues, a superior message and actually discussing the substantive differences between the 2 candidates.

The attack which Obama needs to "fight back" on is not if he is a celebrity or not. He IS a celebrity. That isn't the point of the attack though.

The crux of McCain's attack is to paint Obama as nothing more than a media creation of hype and celebrity without the substance to back it up. McCain is essentially making the "empty suit" argument.

How does this ad "fight back" against that message? I don't think it does at all?

Personally, I don't think Obama or his candidacy is an "empty suit"... I think he can easily combat and "fight back" against that message by showing his substance, keeping his responses intelligent and not wallowing in the muck... and by going head-to-head and face-to-face with McCain as often as possible.

Clearly Obama's got the charisma and motivation aspect of being POTUS wrapped up and in the bag. He needs to show the other aspect of the Presidency, the policy wonk side, the intelligent side, the gravitas side in an intimate, head-to-head setting. At the end of the day this is a choice between 2 candidates, 2 men... it is not about 2 competing media messages and attacks / counter attacks.

Don't look at the Democratic losses in 2000 and 2004 as a model... look at Bill Clinton's win in 1992. Amazingly, that year voters went for the candidate who actually ran on keen intelligence, command of the issues, seriousness, commitment to policy and a Democratic platform and yes... change and hope. I say more of THAT.

"Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been." Hillary Rodham Clinton - June 7, 2008

by twinmom on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:01:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No, Eeyore (none / 0)

Fight back using everything. No taking tactics off the table, no wasting time with hand-wringing, no timid surrender in the hope that America will suddenly start liking nice guys. Obama needs to be the Jackie Chan of politicians if he's to have any hope of winning this. McCain threw a chair. It's nice to finally have a candidate who won't stand around complaining that we're not the kind of people who know how to throw chairs, and instead flings it right back.

Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.

by Endymion on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:41:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It IS possible to (none / 0)

This ad does nothing about that. But every single other ad he's made has. His Olympic ad is a model of what a Presidential campaign should be. But he's hearing complaints that he needs to be pushing back, so now he's pushing back. I'm actually kinda glad he didn't try to spin this as anything other than that.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It IS possible to (none / 0)

Yeah, a campaign over grocery store scanners was ever so enlightening:

Here's a sharp-eyed, behind-the-scenes account of the challenges confronted, with varying degrees of success, by the campaign managers for President George H.W. Bush and Democratic challenger Bill Clinton in the 1992 election campaign. That Mary Matalin and James Carville were on opposite sides of this epic spin-battle and romantically involved adds spice to an already fascinating saga. There are plenty of telling moments along the way--perhaps the most persuasive is Matalin's description of President Bush's infamous, supposedly dumbfounded encounter with a grocery check-out scanner. While her husband used the image to portray Bush as so out of touch that he'd never been to a supermarket, in truth the photo was of the president examining a new product at a National Grocers Association convention. But people believed Carville's spin--mainly because it confirmed what they already thought of President Bush.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/weekend/fi vebest/?id=110009300

by Bush Bites on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 01:19:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doing what he needs to win (none / 0)

McCain's ads AREN'T working. He's getting traction in the polls because of Obama's issues with energy, something they recognized. That's why they responded to the energy issues first, and now are getting around to this as an afterthought.

Nobody is really asking the question, "Is John McCain, in 2008, qualified to serve as CEO of the country? Has he become LESS of a leader since 2000?" A post on TPM's front page suggests that this is actually just Obama trying to get the media to raise this issue, but knowing that if they threw "celebrity" into the ad, they might actually get some traction.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:24:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Me (2.00 / 1)

you like this ad?

I think it's simply awful, and am getting tired of the cheerleading here for each thing the Obama campaign does...even as it continues to fritter away what should be a sizeable lead.

get real on this ad. getting into a tit-for-tat on who is the real celebrity is the last thing Obama needs. right or wrong (and who really cares?), it simple reinforces the meme that the real debate is over who is more real and less celebrity. one of the few things on which McCain likely has an advantage and, certainly, an issue on which he is driving debate.

Obama needs to get back to defining the terms of debate, not responding on McCain's terms.

It's no big deal as this is just one ad during a dead period, but the idea it's a good ad is ludicrous.

by CalDem on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:49:52 AM EST

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Me (2.00 / 2)

Look, that attitude is why we have been losing. If you let your candidate get away with attack ads and they define you, it's over. Obama has to do this so that McCain doesn't get to define him the way he wants to.

If you don't understand this then you don't understand politics.

by sweet potato pie on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:56:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Me (none / 0)

No, I think you're completely wrong. The media is already defining Obama--it's up to him whether or not he responds. Ignoring it and trying to "redefine" the debate--by essentially ignoring the charges of the opposing candidate--is exactly what John Kerry tried to do with the Swift Boaters. You will lose every time with this strategy because it makes you look weak.

The winning strategy is to end the debate by exposing its stupidity, usually by pointing out that the other candidate shares the same traits yours is being accused of having. If you do this, you've turned the debate on them. At that point, everyone stops listening about how bad you are--if you are successful.

This ad perfectly exposes how ludicrous it is for a multi-millionaire politician to be calling another politician a "celebrity."

The poster above is right that if you don't understand this, you don't understand politics. Much like economics, you can't change the market--you can only react to it.

by Covin on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:22:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

C'mon, be fair (none / 0)

Obama has done nothing but promote his energy plan and economic strategy for the past couple of weeks, and what have the media said about that? That McCain is handing out tire gauges. Put this one out and put the rest on TV, and whichever the media wants to pick up is what they want to pick up. Voters sick of hearing that crap will see the positive ads anyway.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:28:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: C'mon, be fair (none / 0)

i'm not saying just be milquetoast. but Obama is defined as the celebrity, if he wants to argue the point it's just reinforcing what McCain wants to talk about. far better strategy to attack on your terms: i..e, attack McCain as the tool of lobbyists/oil, etc. that's winning turf for Obama.

that's the old Clinton trick, by the way. when attacked on a weak spot, change the topic not be defending yourself (or, as this ad does, by saying "i know what you are what am I???"), but rather by attacking on your opponent's weak spot.

by CalDem on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 03:13:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: C'mon, be fair (none / 0)

should read above: "not BY defending..."

by CalDem on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 03:13:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard (2.00 / 1)

No way. This doesn't work at all. Hopefully, they realized it and its just a throwaway for the web. Anyone know if they actually bought points with this?

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:57:19 AM EST

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard (none / 0)

And how does Kaine get so off message?

"I mean, it was funny, but wearing a clown suit and juggling would be funny, too, but it doesn't connect with the concerns Americans have about gas prices, about the war, about the economy," he said. "So I think on things like that, shoot, I hope the McCain camp does more of those ads and we'll just let them do those ads."

He added that while Obama is running positive ads during the Olympics, "Senator McCain is running the same old negative, Karl Rove-style ads that we're all tired of."

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:28:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard (none / 0)

Well, Jerome, he is, according to you, the "weakest Democratic Nominee" in decades, so what did you expect?

Two riders were approaching......the wind begins to howl!

by John in Chicago on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:28:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

If you take it at surface level, maybe, but (none / 0)

TPM Posted this useful analysis:

Does Obama's celebrity ad mean that the Obama camp believes McCain's ad was effective? Nope. It means that they know that they can get the national press corps (especially the campaign press corps) to write about "McCain = corrupt establishment, not really a maverick" as long as they throw in the word "celebrity" so it looks like a response to McCain's ad. Which it is not.

As has already been pointed out by far worthier observers than I, making the election about Obama is the only way Obama loses. If it's about Bush? Obama wins. If it's Obama vs McCain? Obama wins. If it's about some more vague "are you better off than you were four years ago?" Obama wins. Ah, but what if it's a referendum about Obama? Can Team McCain/GOP build enough doubts and worries about Obama? You bet. I think that's where all of those McCain ads want to go.

by Lolis on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:42:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard (none / 0)

Ambinder says it's running on national cable and theorizes that it's meant for "political elites". Sounds about right. Put it on cable news channels and only the viewers looking to see blood will get clubbed with it.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 12:31:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

like the ad (none / 0)

Finally, but wonder if it is too late. Also am not sure that Obama should bandy about the ``celebrity'' word. I think they have to find a new meme to to paint McCain. My suggestion ``rich playboy.''

And bring out how he left his wife in a wheelchair for MONEY.

by ann0nymous on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:14:31 AM EST

Re: like the ad (none / 0)

Do you recognize the blond woman at 0:09? She looks familiar, somehow.

Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.

by Endymion on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 11:43:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ad Watch: Obama Hits Back Hard on Celebrity Me (none / 0)

This diary is funny.

It seems Obama can do no right when it comes to some of you.

by yungblakman on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 04:20:27 PM EST

The ad doesn't hit McCain where it would hurt (none / 0)

As someone who will vote for Obama because the thought of voting for a Republican is horrifying, and who REALLY wants to love Obama but has more gut respect and affection for McCain, this ad sadly doesn't work for me at all.

McCain's ad was powerful and hit on everything I don't like about Obama - his inexperience, my perception of him as arrogant, my discomfort with his "movement" approach that reminds me of far scarier leaders who have not done well by their people. (No, I'm not looking for any excuse to vote against a black man. Don't call me "racist" because I think a black man is arrogant.)

On the other hand, Obama's ad didn't resonate with or enhance any of my fears about mcCain. It made McCain look like a buffoon, and I don't have any worry about that. Most people don't. The ad would have been much more powerful if it hit on McCain for being a nasty hypocritical rich guy whose maverick image is a sham, going from his mansion to celebrity events, yelling at people along the way, playing the maverick while hugging GWB, yelling at people along the way ... Those are the things many worry about with McCain, but this ad didn't enhance those fears. If anything, it made me feel like McCain was probably a nicer guy than I'd previously thought!

You can call me names for having some respect for McCain, but if you can't understand/respect where I'm coming from you're are not understanding/respecting the majority of the country. Dems don't win by having no respect or not understanding the educated middle of the political spectrum.

by JJay on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 10:55:08 PM EST

What happened to a new kind of politics? (none / 0)

The Obama team and the left have been lambasting the McCain commercials for weeks, and then they do a copycat ad?

Anyway, if Obama wants to get into a contest as to who is the biggest celebrity, my guess is that McCain will dive right in.

by dualdiagnosis on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 01:15:41 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.