Bill Richardson | Election 2008 | News

BigGayDeal.com

Bill Richardson's "Job Interview" Campaign Ads

A different approach, although I was ready for him to pull out a Staples "Easy Button".

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Lame campaign. As an ad exec, I think this is poorly written and shot and feels a bit amateurish. While trying to "sell" Richardson's credentials, they seem to forget that the most important attributes - intelligence, leadership, credibility - are ignored. He is put in an inferior position, that of a job applicant, that leaves him looking weak. He is not really the hero of the spot - the interviewer is. And while, on paper, they must have thought this "humor" would humanize Richardson, I don't think it does. He comes off as sort of leaden. Too bad. Richardson is actually an interesting candidate.

    Posted by: gr8guyca | May 10, 2007 11:27:03 AM


  2. As a voter and lover of politics, I like 'em. They're freakin' funny and were successful in getting his considerable resume across without a feeling of superiority. And depicting the presidential campaign as a job application is an interesting twist, and sort of empowering to voters.

    Posted by: PistolPetey | May 10, 2007 12:00:49 PM


  3. gr8guyca, I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I think these ads are 10 times better than most.

    When I watch most political ads that do nothing but try to project a warm and fuzzy "hero" image, I literally scream at my TV "You didn't tell me anything about the candidate! Tell me why I should actually vote for you!" Seriously - I scream. Ask my neighbors. I'm sick and tired of ads that insult my intelligence by assuming I can't understand actual political credentials.

    Unlike most political ads that are vague, or focus on some tiny controversy I care nothing about, these Richardson ads actually tell me something concrete and relevant about the candidate. As a TV viewer and voter, I really appreciate that.

    I think your "rules of marketing" are junk, because I can honestly say I'm much more interested in Richardson as a candidate after watching those ads. I'm still probably not going to vote for the guy, but the ad had a definite positive effect on me.

    Posted by: Rich | May 10, 2007 12:03:17 PM


  4. Another ad guy chimes in:

    Great ads...for "viral spots" or online-only. If they put these on TV, they'll shoot themselves in the foot.

    Being president of the United States is a very serious job and these a bit too light for the "general" audience.

    These are best left to a microsite, MySpace page, etc. where they won't be taken more than half-seriously.

    As far as being "amateurish," give me a break. Don't be so uptight with the critiques. These are simple, to-the-point, and humorous...a great way to reach the younger and tech savvy American. Let's just hope they bother to vote.

    Posted by: Patrick W. | May 10, 2007 12:22:12 PM


  5. Gr8guyCA, what company do you work for? If I ever need an ad campaign done I want to be sure and avoid it.

    Frankly, you sound like the same, tired, stale, old "inside the beltway" thinker that got Democrats in trouble in the first place.

    Thank goodness some in the party have woken up and stopped listening to people like you. Those who follow advice like yours are finding themselves sent back home.

    I thought the ad was brilliant!

    Posted by: Zeke | May 10, 2007 12:28:15 PM


  6. He'll be out the race by labor day '07. These ads are designed to raise money--not influence voters. He doesn't have enough cash to move ahead. Right now it's all about the $$$.

    Posted by: anon | May 10, 2007 12:51:56 PM


  7. Interesting ads. I agree w/ Patrick W that they're best suited for the online audience as viral marketing, not to be used on TV.

    Posted by: gabriel | May 10, 2007 1:20:46 PM


  8. Yuck.

    Hey Bill, so what if you are paying teachers more now - did the number of graduates from HS increase?

    Posted by: shane | May 10, 2007 1:27:29 PM


  9. I like the ads! Richardson can do a more serious campaign later in the race, presuming he's still in. But "nominated for The Nobel Peace Prize 4 Times!" By whom? Himself? The Nobel comittee keeps names of nominees secret for 50 years. The only way to find out is if the nominee (or family friend) tells you so.And we can't confirm for decades. Maybe it was a joke?
    I'm a little slow.

    Posted by: TheGayGardener | May 10, 2007 6:55:09 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Christopher Gaines: Life without Parole for Homophobic Murder« «