Over the course of the semester one thing has really stuck with me. I need to pay more attention to what is going on in the political world. Before we started talking about the Blunt/Carnahan campaigns I had no clue about it. Now it’s partially due to me not being from Missouri; therefore not really caring about who gets elected from this state but I still should have known what was going on. I only signed up for this class because my advisor told me to take it from the 4000 level credit but I am glad that I did because it has been really interesting listening to what everyone has had to say.
As a side note for anyone who actually reads what I write. I did notice that I spelled a couple of words wrong in my last post. I just forgot to hit spell check before I published it.
This advertisement caught my attention because of the way it is formatted. The audio and graphics make it sounds like comedy act of some kind. Blunt’s campaign is trying to portray Carnahan as a joke but they are doing so in a creative way. When you see this ad, it doesn’t immediately come across as an attack ad, but it certainly is. It focuses on missteps in the Carnahan campaign and in some ways portrays Robin Carnahan as a clown.
This is a different approach than the first ad I analyzed for the Blunt campaign. In the first ad, Roy Blunt was portrayed as a regular Missourian who cared about his community. It highlighted Blunt’s life and career in a positive way. This ad, however, does not highlight what Roy Blunt’s positive qualities are. It simply attacks Robin Carnahan.
Rubberstamp Robin and Obama the Riddler
- Summary: This ad is the same message that Roy Blunt has been pushing since the beginning of his campaign saying that Obama and Carnahan are in ‘cahoots’. This particular ad shows how Carnahan will support Obama because he helped her raise money. In the ad, Obama says that Carnahan owes him and she can repay him by supporting cap and trade.
- Cap and Trade is an environmental policy that puts a cap on emissions to improve air quality. According to Blunt, this act will take some MO jobs away but he doesn’t say how and the ad doesn’t mention what cap and trade actually does. The message sent in this aspect is: Carnahan does whatever Obama wants her to even if it kills MO jobs (the jobs of her constituents). Unfortunately, the ad doesn’t say anything about the possible benefits of Cap and Trade and makes it seem as though it is all negative because it is connected with Obama
- This ad is aimed at the young republicans and/or more internet-based constituents. The people who are bored by Blunt’s everyday repetitive ads might be intrigued by this cartoonistic approach. It is also aimed at those who are not Obama fans. It criticizes his interest in golfing over political matters. It quite literally puts Obama in the position of a villain while Carnahan is given the role of the sidekick which is a very strong message to send.
- The ad is effective initially in making it look like she is supporting him because of the money he raised, but not effective at all when the topics discussed are researched even on a base level. Making light of political situations is not a good strategy on Blunt’s part. Which is probably why this is a youtube ad and not a national spot.
- This ad proves to have no new message to offer the MO voters from my initial ad in Blog 2, only a new angle in which to judge: through a cartoon aimed at a younger more tech-friendly audience.
For this blog I chose an advertisement that talked about Robin Carnahan. It was approved by Roy Blunt and did not talk well about Carnahan. The ad calls her actions phony and misleading. It talks about how she will say anything. The advertisement says she rubber stamps the Obama Agenda. I was not familiar with the term rubber stamping but according to Websters New World Dictionary, it means to approve or endorse in a routine manner, without thought – *rubber stamp – 2. [Colloq.] a) a person, bureau, legislature, etc., that approves or endorses something in a routine manner, without thought, b) any routine approval.” In this context it is saying that Robin Carnahan rubber stamps Obama’s policies and bills. She might not have much power but she wants to make the current president happy so she endorses what he endorses. The ad mentions the “disastrous stimulus plan,” government-run health care, and new energy tax. It shows all three of these things in a negative light. It shows Obama in a negative light because these are things being done while he is in office. The ad makes a correlation with Obama’s bad decisions as a democrat and the fact that Carnahan is too a democrat. The ad is getting viewers to compare Obama’s negative choices with Carnahan’s future choices.
The main message given by this advertisement is that Carnahan has not made good decisions in the past and will not in the future. The current administration is not acting appropriately and instead they are making negative decisions. If Carnahan gets elected into office these negative decisions and outcomes will continue. Since the advertisement is approved by Blunt there is an underlying message that he will do better if he were in office and that people should consider him instead.
The intended audience is voters and people who pay attention to politics. It also might appeal to republicans because it is bashing Carnahan, a democrat.
I believe that this commercial is effective. People are worried about the current administration and that shows because Obama’s approval rate has dropped since he’s been in office. This happens for a number of different reasons as we talked about in class but it still shows that many people are not happy with the way things are going. Even if people do not pay attention to the current administration it is still effective. It puts the notion in their mind that things are not going well and there needs to be a change. A change meaning there needs to be a republican elected as the Missouri Senator. The ad does a good job at making negative correlations between Obama and Carnahan without looking like a low, mud-slinging commercial.
The commercial I used for blog #2 was an advertisement for Carnahan talking poorly about Roy Blunt. The ads both talked about negative previous decisions. In blog #2 the commercial does not make correlations between the current political administration because there is not a republican in office. It also talks about different issues than the ad I used in this blog. The ad bashing Carnahan talks about issues such as the health care plan, the stimulus plan and energy tax. The ad bashing Blunt talks about big oil companies, clean energy and new jobs. The ads differ because it talks about Blunt saying no to things and Carnahan saying yes to things. The Blunt ad that Carnahan approved starts out happy and it looks like it is going to praise a certain candidate. Instead it takes a turn and starts attacking Blunt. In the Carnahan ad that Blunt approved, the ad starts attacking Carnahan right away.
Overall this ad differs from the ad I used in blog #2. They are alike in the fact that they both attack an opposing candidate but they attack in different ways. I believe the ad is effective in many ways.
I found this ad on Roy Blunt’s YouTube page. It was rather buried, they are not on the main page you have to look through the entire library to find them, but they are by far the most entertaining in my opinion. I honestly thought that Missouri political ads were better than this, but I guess not.
What isn’t going on in this ad. Robin Carnahan as Robin from Batman and Harry Reid is playing Batman. I guess they couldn’t come up with a super villain evil enough for Nancy Pelosi. In this episode Rubber Stamp Robin is helping Batman push health care reform through the House with the help of Nancy Pelosi, almost like guilt by association. My favorite line:
Holy Medicare cuts Batman and Nancy! You crammed that bill right down their throats!
I don’t think that these ads have aired on television as entertaining as these are. I think if these were to air on television I think that they might gain national attention. I could see SNL bring back the Ambiguously Gay Duo for this one!
I’m not sure if Blunt is trying to target children with this ad, but maybe a younger generation who surfs the web more than they watch television.
The main message of this ad is that Robin Carnahan will rubber stamp the Obama and Pelosi agenda if elected. Another message in this ad is the health care issue. Showing that Carnahan was pro health care and everything that Pelosi and Obama.
Is the ad effective? To an extent yes I think so. It definitely grabs your attention, whether it is for the right reasons or not is up for debate.
This ad is very different from Blog 2. Not only was the first a Robin Carnahan ad, but that was a serious ad about health care.
If you want to watch the next episode of the adventures of Rubber Stamp Robin here it is.
For this blog I chose a different campaign ad for the Missouri Senate race when compared to blog 2. This ad was posted by the Carnahan campaign last week, and features Robin Carnahan discussing Roy Blunt’s record. Carnahan begins the ad by discussing Roy Blunt’s attempts to avoid having a debate. Carnahan claims this is because he refuses to talk about his Washington record. Then, Carnahan tries to appeal to the audience by saying that Missouri constituents cannot be fooled, they know Blunt’s record. She discusses earmarks, and Blunt’s voting towards a pay raise. Carnahan believes that congress should take a pay cut until the budget is balanced. She ends the ad by introducing herself. The intended audience for this ad would be Missouri Democrats or Independents who have yet to decide who they will be voting for on November 2nd. The main purpose of this ad is to have the candidate speak directly to the voters regarding her opponent’s record. The text within the ad is bold and highlights Blunt’s negative attributes. I believe that the ad is effective because it is short and to the point. Carnahan gets her main points out there in a 33 second ad. The ad is different from my previous post for many reasons. The last ad I posted was very dramatic as well as did not feature Robin Carnahan. It gave negative information on Roy Blunt and used images to get the point across. This new ad focused more on the issues as well as featuring the candidate.
Framing is loosely defined as a way a story is told that makes the reader sway towards one arguement more so than the other.
This article about Blunt/Carnahan seems very unbiased, but when you look at some specific information given it seems the author is trying to make us readers unknowlingly think a certain way. Although article’s title Roy Blunt outraises Robin Carnahan in the Second Quarter” makes it sound like Blunt is succeeding in the race. But as the story goes on to tell how Blunt’s fundraising money is from PAC, while Carnahan’s is more from individuals we see the writer leaning towards Carnahan. As quotes from different specialist say that it will be a close race, they seem to hint to the fact that Carnahan is the underdog.
I think it’s close, and Carnahan could win if she runs a really good campaign and Obama gets a few breaks on the economy.
Overall it seems like this article is trying to stay unbiased, but because of the information given it seems that Carnahan is portrayed as the ‘people’s’ choice for governor, while Blunt is supported by ‘big business’.