ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919 
|
Post by ericn on Oct 30, 2018 7:07:45 GMT -6
Can’t wait to get this election over next week, I’m just sick of the ads from both sides. OK the fact that the KC area is split between 2 states and that might multiply the number of ads, but I can’t help thinking all this negative on both sides is making people both more polarized and apathetic.
The funny thing is all of this used to put money in my wallet, the biggest political production houses in the Midwest were my clients as were a ton of radio and TV stations. I miss the days of having a drink in the bar across the street from the Wi capital with the Republican Gov. and the head of the Democratic Party with lobbyists covering everybody’s bar bill. We all got along and it was a typical weekday evening, at the rime my apartment was 1/2 block From the Capital next to the office of NORMAL.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 30, 2018 8:11:43 GMT -6
I have never received so many political ads via mail, email and text in my life. I've also been visited a few times by folks stumping door to door.
All of them from left leaning candidates. I guess they are a bit worried..
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 30, 2018 11:02:33 GMT -6
I have never received so many political ads via mail, email and text in my life. I've also been visited a few times by folks stumping door to door. All of them from left leaning candidates. I guess they are a bit worried.. Don'r confuse anger with worry. There's a LOT of anger, and for good reason.
I'll say no more, we shouldn't even be discussing this here.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 30, 2018 12:57:29 GMT -6
If you're seeing canvassers it means they've got enthusiasm. If you're seeing ads, it means they've got money. Regardless of political stripe.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 31, 2018 10:51:48 GMT -6
If you're seeing canvassers it means they've got enthusiasm. If you're seeing ads, it means they've got money. Regardless of political stripe. And most of the "left leaning candidates" are eschewing corporate contributions this cycle.
We still shouldn't be discussing this here.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 31, 2018 11:46:54 GMT -6
I was just making a descriptive statement, meant completely apolitically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 11:52:40 GMT -6
There's one (and only one) good thing about political ads. There's a nice temporary boost of income to the people editing and mixing the audio.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Nov 1, 2018 7:35:38 GMT -6
There's one (and only one) good thing about political ads. There's a nice temporary boost of income to the people editing and mixing the audio. Yeah like I said I had major political production houses on both sides of the political spectrum as clients and benefited from it all financially, the voice over talent also sees a bump in buisness, but a dirty little secret is that so much of the political stuff is centered in a talent pool that mostly dose political work. It’s funny that in TX and now MO I hear WI and IL voice over talent I have known for years. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Nov 1, 2018 7:43:38 GMT -6
If you're seeing canvassers it means they've got enthusiasm. If you're seeing ads, it means they've got money. Regardless of political stripe. And most of the "left leaning candidates" are eschewing corporate contributions this cycle.
We still shouldn't be discussing this here.
As the one who started this thread: this is meant to be apolitical, it’s about the nuisance of all these ads from both sides, but as a left leaning moderate ( OK in TX they thought I was a commie) I’ll point out what operatives for both parties have pointed out to me: in the era of PACs and Super PAC’s it’s easy to not take corporate contributions, they support you through other groups. A radio ad sales guy told me 2/3’s of the political buys have not been from campaigns and there are new rules on how they have to price for non campaign groups! Damn it I want to see penis pill ads again! |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 1, 2018 10:46:28 GMT -6
And most of the "left leaning candidates" are eschewing corporate contributions this cycle.
We still shouldn't be discussing this here.
As the one who started this thread: this is meant to be apolitical, it’s about the nuisance of all these ads from both sides, but as a left leaning moderate ( OK in TX they thought I was a commie) I’ll point out what operatives for both parties have pointed out to me: in the era of PACs and Super PAC’s it’s easy to not take corporate contributions, they support you through other groups. A radio ad sales guy told me 2/3’s of the political buys have not been from campaigns and there are new rules on how they have to price for non campaign groups! Damn it I want to see penis pill ads again! As a person who voted last week I wish the ads would cease when the ballot goes in.
You'd think that with all this newfangled invasive tech they could figure out a way to do that. Especially the damn phone calls and text messages....
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Nov 1, 2018 11:19:20 GMT -6
Man, I'm not getting bugged by anyone! Fingers crossed.
I don't watch any TV so haven't had to endure a single ad there and no one's come by or called/txted. Lucky me I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 1, 2018 14:54:23 GMT -6
Man, I'm not getting bugged by anyone! Fingers crossed. I don't watch any TV so haven't had to endure a single ad there and no one's come by or called/txted. Lucky me I guess. Since I live in Georgia, the governor election is big news since it's just about the closest a democrat has come to the governorship in forever. Since she's a black woman, it's also being watched very closely by just about all the left across the country and she's been raking in huge amounts of money from liberal donations originating outside of Georgia. I just wish politicians would get back to telling me how they are going to fix the problems I'm concerned about, and stop telling me that I need to vote for them solely based on their gender and skin color. I don't care about those things, I just want to know how you'll benefit my life if you want me to vote for you. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Nov 1, 2018 18:44:39 GMT -6
Man, I'm not getting bugged by anyone! Fingers crossed. I don't watch any TV so haven't had to endure a single ad there and no one's come by or called/txted. Lucky me I guess. Since I live in Georgia, the governor election is big news since it's just about the closest a democrat has come to the governorship in forever. Since she's a black woman, it's also being watched very closely by just about all the left across the country and she's been raking in huge amounts of money from liberal donations originating outside of Georgia. I just wish politicians would get back to telling me how they are going to fix the problems I'm concerned about, and stop telling me that I need to vote for them solely based on their gender and skin color. I don't care about those things, I just want to know how you'll benefit my life if you want me to vote for you. Heheh. So it's just because of her skin color and gender that people are paying attention to her and also we should all stop viewing things in terms of skin color and gender? (meant like, with a wink, not with like, rhetorical malice) |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 2, 2018 14:03:24 GMT -6
Since I live in Georgia, the governor election is big news since it's just about the closest a democrat has come to the governorship in forever. Since she's a black woman, it's also being watched very closely by just about all the left across the country and she's been raking in huge amounts of money from liberal donations originating outside of Georgia. I just wish politicians would get back to telling me how they are going to fix the problems I'm concerned about, and stop telling me that I need to vote for them solely based on their gender and skin color. I don't care about those things, I just want to know how you'll benefit my life if you want me to vote for you. Heheh. So it's just because of her skin color and gender that people are paying attention to her and also we should all stop viewing things in terms of skin color and gender? (meant like, with a wink, not with like, rhetorical malice) Well, my statement was more towards the dichotomy of her TV ads literally saying "Vote for me based on the color of my skin and my gender" and her simultaneously saying that "nobody should be judged on the color of their skin or their gender".. Which has inevitably led to excruciating focus on both her and her competition's gender and skin color! I've literally heard: "I'm voting for her because she's a black woman who will know my struggles" - young white woman And "I'm voting for Kemp (the other guy) because I don't think a black woman will consider my needs" - old white man And I've also not heard of anyone actually argue the facts. It's been nothing but considerations based on race and gender from anyone I've talked to. Almost no one could even mention a factual talking point beyond this. I find this wholly ridiculous that in this day and age that we're still using race and gender to decide politics.Which is why I think politicians should stop playing the identity politics card and return to classical politics of "vote for me because I believe ____ on issue ____." I don't believe in identity politics at all, and I feel that to focus on such things generally means the candidate has little else to platform on, and I think the (lack of) results during most modern politician's tenures speak volumes about this. Skin color and gender don't matter to me one bit, only their stances on the issues that I find important. Unfortunately saying so aloud always draws ire from those who would complain of bigotry/bias if someone were to mention color and gender as some type of political qualification, but would also complain if you didn't agree that someone's color and gender might beget a background that gives them a supposedly unique take on politics. It's a no-win situation for anyone willing to voice an opinion that's neither left or right, but one of real interest in the candidate's platform, because you're going to be demonized by both sides for wanting deeper discussion into the topics rather than quick alignment to the beliefs of those who surround you, and any hesitation is generally regarded as being aligned with "the other side" and the conversation turns bad, or simply ceases. But that's the political world of today. You must align with one side or the other, and regardless of what stance you take, either/both sides see you as a bad person and attempt to shame you for being moderate/centrist or of mixed beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 2, 2018 16:22:12 GMT -6
Here's some quotes that kind of sum things up for me...
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.” - Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (Published in 1966)
"The truth of the matter is my policies are so mainstream that if I had set the same polices that I have back in the 1980's I'd be considered a moderate Republican." - US President Barack Obama
“We have a large public that is very ignorant about public affairs and very susceptible to simplistic slogans by candidates who appear out of nowhere, have no track record, but mouth appealing slogans” ― Zbigniew Brzeziński
“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” - George Carlin
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.” ― Edward L. Bernays, 'Propaganda' (Published in 1928)
"It's a big club and you ain't in it!" - George Carlin
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. ” ― Zbigniew Brzeziński, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era - (Published in 1970)
SENATOR RON WYDEN: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"
DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE JAMES R. CLAPPER: "No, sir."
“Sort of the breaking point was seeing the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, directly lie under oath to Congress. ... Seeing that really meant for me there was no going back.” - Edward Snowden
"We have discovered weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." - President George W. Bush
"You are either with us or you are with the terrorists." - President George W. Bush
LESLEY STAHL on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"
SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."
"We came, we saw, he died! Ha-ha!" - US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton (On the death of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi who was sodomised with a bayonet)
“Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.” - Zbigniew Brzezinski (Former National Security Adviser to US President Jimmy Carter)
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel (Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama)
"Grab 'em by the pussy, you can do anything." - Donald Trump
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" - US President Bill Clinton
"Call me, we're in the dereg (deregulation) business, maybe we can help." - Vice President George H.W. Bush (During his tour of Monsanto offering to help Monsanto get their products approved prior to 'Roundup' being passed for use in food crop farming by the FDA)
"We're doing God's work." - Lloyd Blankfein (CEO of Goldman Sachs)
On saving the planet - "The planet isn’t going anywhere. We are! We’re goin’ away. Pack your shit folks, we’re goin’ away. We won’t leave much of a trace either, thank god for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. The planet’ll be here and we’ll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake, an evolutionary cul de sac. The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas, a surface nuisance." - George Carlin
"I'm just a patsy!" - Lee Harvey Oswald
"It's just a ride!" - Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Nov 2, 2018 16:53:37 GMT -6
Heheh. So it's just because of her skin color and gender that people are paying attention to her and also we should all stop viewing things in terms of skin color and gender? (meant like, with a wink, not with like, rhetorical malice) Well, my statement was more towards the dichotomy of her TV ads literally saying "Vote for me based on the color of my skin and my gender" and her simultaneously saying that "nobody should be judged on the color of their skin or their gender".. Which has inevitably led to excruciating focus on both her and her competition's gender and skin color! I've literally heard: "I'm voting for her because she's a black woman who will know my struggles" - young white woman And "I'm voting for Kemp (the other guy) because I don't think a black woman will consider my needs" - old white man And I've also not heard of anyone actually argue the facts. It's been nothing but considerations based on race and gender from anyone I've talked to. Almost no one could even mention a factual talking point beyond this. I find this wholly ridiculous that in this day and age that we're still using race and gender to decide politics.Which is why I think politicians should stop playing the identity politics card and return to classical politics of "vote for me because I believe ____ on issue ____." I don't believe in identity politics at all, and I feel that to focus on such things generally means the candidate has little else to platform on, and I think the (lack of) results during most modern politician's tenures speak volumes about this. Skin color and gender don't matter to me one bit, only their stances on the issues that I find important. Unfortunately saying so aloud always draws ire from those who would complain of bigotry/bias if someone were to mention color and gender as some type of political qualification, but would also complain if you didn't agree that someone's color and gender might beget a background that gives them a supposedly unique take on politics. It's a no-win situation for anyone willing to voice an opinion that's neither left or right, but one of real interest in the candidate's platform, because you're going to be demonized by both sides for wanting deeper discussion into the topics rather than quick alignment to the beliefs of those who surround you, and any hesitation is generally regarded as being aligned with "the other side" and the conversation turns bad, or simply ceases. But that's the political world of today. You must align with one side or the other, and regardless of what stance you take, either/both sides see you as a bad person and attempt to shame you for being moderate/centrist or of mixed beliefs. I think there's a lot to this. I too am decidedly non-partisan. Sure, one side is a helluva lot more gratuitously fraudulent to me in this particular moment (I believe false equivalency is one of the most weaponized things going right now) but that creates zero inherent loyalty towards the other side, for me. I guess I'm lucky that I have a tight group of really, really close friends that I've known a long time so there's no real jockeying for identity that I have to put up with. I'm perfectly comfortable being un-aligned politically and frankly, I tend to have some issues with those who are zealously partisan. But to each their own. Mighty hard to claim objectivity in these matters. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 3, 2018 11:58:01 GMT -6
I'm finding a lot of this to be mean-spirited and suffused (perhaps inadvertantly) by a somewhat nasty undercurrent that I don't care for.
You just try to fit a substantive policy statement into a 30 second political ad and see how it works for you.
I find "Vote for me, I'm a black woman and I understand the problems that a lot of people are having" to be a lot more honest than the outright racist lies being trumpeted by the other side in ITS ad slots. (No, a bunch of poor people on foot with little or nothing to eat are not going to "invade" the USA.)
For one thing it tells me that she's going to support and protect health control, which, at the age of 68 with longstanding "preexisting conditions", is a really big deal for me. Yes, I believe the young black woman is going to be more supportive of me needs than the old rich white guy. Who just sees me as another cash cow.
Not to mention the phony "endorsement" ads being paid for by Big Pharma against legislation to protect dialysis against "Deregulation" - i.e. downsizing - here in CA. (Disclaimer - a good friend of mine and talented drummer is a dialysis patient.)
I identify as a "radical centrist". Centrist because I support both controlled capitalism and mild socialist programs, both to the benefit of the country as a whole. Radical because I believe that radical political action will be required to break up the current state of affairs - things like getting corporate and religious money out of politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 3, 2018 17:09:03 GMT -6
I'm finding a lot of this to be mean-spirited and suffused (perhaps inadvertantly) by a somewhat nasty undercurrent that I don't care for.
You just try to fit a substantive policy statement into a 30 second political ad and see how it works for you.
I find "Vote for me, I'm a black woman and I understand the problems that a lot of people are having" to be a lot more honest than the outright racist lies being trumpeted by the other side in ITS ad slots. (No, a bunch of poor people on foot with little or nothing to eat are not going to "invade" the USA.)
For one thing it tells me that she's going to support and protect health control, which, at the age of 68 with longstanding "preexisting conditions", is a really big deal for me. Yes, I believe the young black woman is going to be more supportive of me needs than the old rich white guy. Who just sees me as another cash cow.
Not to mention the phony "endorsement" ads being paid for by Big Pharma against legislation to protect dialysis against "Deregulation" - i.e. downsizing - here in CA. (Disclaimer - a good friend of mine and talented drummer is a dialysis patient.)
I identify as a "radical centrist". Centrist because I support both controlled capitalism and mild socialist programs, both to the benefit of the country as a whole. Radical because I believe that radical political action will be required to break up the current state of affairs - things like getting corporate and religious money out of politics.
That's quite brave of you to openly say that you expect a black woman to think and act a certain way in politics simply because of her gender and color of her skin. Myself, I'm saying that I'm the opposite. I don't care about that stuff. I want the qualities of their platform to sway me, not play into long-standing social expectations on race to gain votes. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 3, 2018 17:10:31 GMT -6
I'm finding a lot of this to be mean-spirited and suffused (perhaps inadvertantly) by a somewhat nasty undercurrent that I don't care for.
You just try to fit a substantive policy statement into a 30 second political ad and see how it works for you.
I find "Vote for me, I'm a black woman and I understand the problems that a lot of people are having" to be a lot more honest than the outright racist lies being trumpeted by the other side in ITS ad slots. (No, a bunch of poor people on foot with little or nothing to eat are not going to "invade" the USA.)
For one thing it tells me that she's going to support and protect health control, which, at the age of 68 with longstanding "preexisting conditions", is a really big deal for me. Yes, I believe the young black woman is going to be more supportive of me needs than the old rich white guy. Who just sees me as another cash cow.
Not to mention the phony "endorsement" ads being paid for by Big Pharma against legislation to protect dialysis against "Deregulation" - i.e. downsizing - here in CA. (Disclaimer - a good friend of mine and talented drummer is a dialysis patient.)
I identify as a "radical centrist". Centrist because I support both controlled capitalism and mild socialist programs, both to the benefit of the country as a whole. Radical because I believe that radical political action will be required to break up the current state of affairs - things like getting corporate and religious money out of politics.
That's quite brave of you to openly say that you expect a black woman to think and act a certain way in politics simply because of her gender and color of her skin. I've heard people call black female politicians like Candace Owens "race traitors" for daring to not be blue checked Democrats.. Myself, I'm saying that I'm the opposite. I don't care about that stuff. I want the qualities of their platform to sway me, not play into long-standing social expectations on race to gain votes. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Nov 3, 2018 17:37:46 GMT -6
I'm finding a lot of this to be mean-spirited and suffused (perhaps inadvertantly) by a somewhat nasty undercurrent that I don't care for.
You just try to fit a substantive policy statement into a 30 second political ad and see how it works for you.
I find "Vote for me, I'm a black woman and I understand the problems that a lot of people are having" to be a lot more honest than the outright racist lies being trumpeted by the other side in ITS ad slots. (No, a bunch of poor people on foot with little or nothing to eat are not going to "invade" the USA.)
For one thing it tells me that she's going to support and protect health control, which, at the age of 68 with longstanding "preexisting conditions", is a really big deal for me. Yes, I believe the young black woman is going to be more supportive of me needs than the old rich white guy. Who just sees me as another cash cow.
Not to mention the phony "endorsement" ads being paid for by Big Pharma against legislation to protect dialysis against "Deregulation" - i.e. downsizing - here in CA. (Disclaimer - a good friend of mine and talented drummer is a dialysis patient.)
I identify as a "radical centrist". Centrist because I support both controlled capitalism and mild socialist programs, both to the benefit of the country as a whole. Radical because I believe that radical political action will be required to break up the current state of affairs - things like getting corporate and religious money out of politics.
That's quite brave of you to openly say that you expect a black woman to think and act a certain way in politics simply because of her gender and color of her skin. Myself, I'm saying that I'm the opposite. I don't care about that stuff. I want the qualities of their platform to sway me, not play into long-standing social expectations on race to gain votes. You really don't see the platform? Because I sure do. But then I've probably seen more of her speechifyin' on TV since I'm a bit of a news junkie these days. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 28, 2019 8:43:18 GMT -6
JohnkennLooks like we got a bot trying to sell stuff..
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 28, 2019 9:56:25 GMT -6
Political ads? Hasn't there been running continuously on CNN for the past 2 years?
|
|
