Pro-Paul group unleashes fiery attack ad

[Brett85]

This ad should ensure that Rand loses at least 5% in the polls.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

This ad should ensure that Rand loses at least 5% in the polls.

It's more likely to lose him ~10-15% of Cruz "second choicers."

 

[devil21]

Yall do understand that the ad was designed to be awful on purpose, right?

Reminds me of the first minute of this:

 

[JohnGalt23g]

Yall do understand that the ad was designed to be awful on purpose, right?

Well, then it succeeded, in spades.

I get the point of rallying the troops on Sunday. And I get the point of it being light-hearted. But this is the type of ad that scares solid right-wing GOPers, especially those with money, away.

 

[squirl22]

Here is what Political said today:

Paul got some back-up Friday when a super PAC supporting the Kentucky Republican released a bombastic ad declaring “Sunday, Sunday, Sunday” would be the “biggest of brawl for liberty of the century.”

Republican hawks are nervous that Paul could win.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...as-been-waiting-for-118449.html#ixzz3bfkwynUc

Ummm...interesting that his opponents like the ad better than his so-called supporters.
​

 

[scottditzen]

I think yous guys are being a little too hard on this ad. I view it like the Jib Jab stuff. A lot of people who aren't politically savvy or really know who Rand Paul is will see this and laugh about it. Even better, they'll laugh AT Ted Cruz, Barack Obama and Lindsey Graham.

Now if you want a truly terrible ad I encourage you to seek out the Hilary Clinton country music video.

I promise that will bring you to your senses in what's really a waste of money.

 

[Matt Collins]

Why did you title the thread of the ad fiery and not awful? Why didn't you announce it as Pro-Paul group's awful new ad?

I pasted the title of the original article

 

[Danke]

I pasted the title of the original article

And added a thumbs up approval.

 

[jj-]

Yall do understand that the ad was designed to be awful on purpose, right?

Is the website of the group who made the ad also awful on purpose?

 

[TaftFan]

Is the website of the group who made the ad also awful on purpose?

No, by nature.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Stop. Helping.

 

[afwjam]

Quarter of a million views and a dozen odd articles is worth something. I do not think it's as bad as people are saying, and it might even be good. Let's see how things go down tomorrow.

 

[freshjiva]

That was worse than Ron Paul's "He's catchin on, I'm tellin ya!" ad in NH. If you haven't seen it, good. Seriously, this ad probably just took us 2 steps backward unless it was aired specifically in the middle of WrestleMania. And if that's the case, it shouldn't be on youtube.

Matt - do the campaign, and all of us a favor, and just stop posting stuff for a while.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Quarter of a million views and a dozen odd articles is worth something. I do not think it's as bad as people are saying, and it might even be good. Let's see how things go down tomorrow.

In the old media it was true enough that any coverage was good coverage, In the Internet Age, that paradigm has shifted. It is not always a safe assumption that high view counts are a good thing. And, we will not feel the impact of this mistake until Cruz drops out of the race and his supporters go elsewhere.

Just like every major war the US has ever fought, we keep trying to fight the LAST war instead of the CURRENT war. These folks do not yet seem to comprehend that the Internet has changed everything.

 

[RonPaul4Prez2012]

embarrassing LPAC

 

[eleganz]

Classy does not always get the most attention. I highly suggest a lot of you guys to take some campaign and marketing courses in anticipation for 2016, if this video upsets you, so will a lot of other things coming up. To mitigate any future anger, it is better to understand why things are cheesy and why people love cheesy things even though they hate it.

260,000 views on such a shit-poor made youtube video by a bunch of corrupt and unknowledgeable politicos, really makes ya wonder

Oh and a well made official campaign video that was released at the same time as the cheesy Sunday vid only received 813 views.

 

[EBounding]

If the ad slammed McConnell instead of Cruz I'd okay with it I guess. Cruz Supporters can't STAND McConnell. But we all know why he wasn't mentioned.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

I highly suggest a lot of you guys to take some campaign and marketing courses in anticipation for 2016, if this upsets you, so will a lot of other things in the future. To mitigate any future anger, it is better to understand why things are cheesy and why people love cheesy things even though they hate it.

260,000 views on such a shit-poor made youtube video by a bunch of corrupt and unknowledgeable politicos, really makes ya wonder

It's not the 'cheesyness' that is a problem.

You want to take a juvenile swipe at another candidate, take that swipe at a candidate you don't share a base with. You want to take a swipe at a candidate you share a base with, it needs to be a reasoned swipe. Rand Paul is playing Chess, Benton is playing checkers.

Ads can be cheesy and that's fine, match your target audience, cheesy sophisticated or otherwise.

Attacks can be stupid and that's fine. A stupid attack needs to be against someone that supporters of an opponent with whom you share a base will LIKE. Go after Bush and have him cowering like a little girl behind his father and brother. Cruz supporters will point at that and go YEAHH!!!

You want to go after Cruz, that's fine too, but you need to act like an adult when you go after an opponent with whom you share a base, or you will alienate the very voters you will end up needing to win a primary.

This is all freshman level marketing stuff.

 

[eleganz]

It's not the 'cheesyness' that is a problem.

You want to take a juvenile swipe at another candidate, take that swipe at a candidate you don't share a base with. You want to take a swipe at a candidate you share a base with, it needs to be a reasoned swipe. Rand Paul is playing Chess, Benton is playing checkers.

Ads can be cheesy and that's fine, match your target audience, cheesy sophisticated or otherwise.

Attacks can be stupid and that's fine. A stupid attack needs to be against someone that supporters of an opponent with whom you share a base will LIKE. Go after Bush and have him cowering like a little girl behind his father and brother. Cruz supporters will point at that and go YEAHH!!!

You want to go after Cruz, that's fine too, but you need to act like an adult when you go after an opponent with whom you share a base, or you will alienate the very voters you will end up needing to win a primary.

This is all freshman level marketing stuff.

I don't know, I thought that Cruz part was pretty funny. If Cruz super pac did an internet-based video and showed Rand in the same caricature manner maybe with an Aqua Buddha, I'd call a low blow and laugh it off, I would forget about it next week. Some people take those things more seriously. By the time Cruz drops out, none of those people will remember this ad, they don't hate Rand for this ad as it is the least of their problems.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

If the ad slammed McConnell instead of Cruz I'd okay with it I guess. Cruz Supporters can't STAND McConnell. But we all know why he wasn't mentioned.

Aye, I do not understand why so many self-proclaimed "experts" do not understand this. This is stuff you get in first-year marketing classes.

Pepsi wants to make an ad. They know that most Coke drinkers have Pepsi as their #2 choice. They do not call Coke drinkers 'idiots' because that would offend them, and drive them away from your product. They DO call Sprite drinkers idiots, because then Coke drinkers will point and laugh, feel an affinity with your position, and maybe next time Pepsi will be their first choice. If the Pepsi commercial talks about Coke at all, it is usually done in this quasi-scientific "Eight out of ten ordinary blue collar workers just like you prefer Pepsi in a blind taste test."