Advertising | Barack Obama | Election 2008 | News | Ohio | Texas

BigGayDeal.com

First Look: Obama's Targeted Texas and Ohio Gay Ad Buy

Obama_lgbt_ad1

Earlier today the Advocate reported that the Obama campaign was doing targeted ad buys in Ohio and Texas in advance of the primaries there on March 4th. According to the Advocate, "Full page ads will appear starting this Friday in Outlook Weekly of Columbus, the Gay People's Chronicle of Cleveland, the Dallas Voice, and OutSmart, which is Houston based."

They report: "[Obama LGBT steering committee member Eric] Stern called the coordinated buy 'the icing on the cake' in terms of the Obama camp's outreach to the gay community in Ohio and Texas. 'It's a direct appeal to LGBT voters asking for their support,' he said, adding that the ad includes information about how people can get involved with the campaign. The Obama campaign has actively been trying to cut into the longstanding ties between gays and lesbians and Hillary Clinton."

Towleroad has obtained a "generic" version of the ad which you can see AFTER THE JUMP...

Obama_lgbt_ad_2

The Ohio and Texas versions, according to Stern, "include specific information on voting in those states and how to get involved with the campaign locally." Stampp Corbin, the Co-Chair of the National LGBT Leadership Council, was the catalyst behind making these ads happen as a part of their efforts to mobilize and energize LGBT voters in Ohio & Texas.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. The viciousness and mysoginy of the Obama fanatics has really turned me off to this election. I like both Obama and Hillary but prefer Hillary. All I've heard from Obama people are the most hurtful insults calling her a witch, an evil bitch, and even a whore dyke. I honestly don't know if I can vote for him considering all the sick Karl Rove like attacks his people have been perpetrating.

    Posted by: Dale | Feb 27, 2008 11:36:15 PM


  2. "We have come a long way since the Stonewall riots"

    Who is this "we," Barack? You weren't there. And neither have you been anywhere else that gay people without tubs of money to hand over to you might happen to gather.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Feb 27, 2008 11:39:15 PM


  3. Unlike John McCain, both Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be equally good with regard to LGBT policies and advancement of of civil rights. I really don't get all the fighting above. I prefer Obama, but I'd be content with Hillary just fine.

    Now, I just went to both of their websites to find their LGBT platforms. On the Obama homepage, finding the LGBT page was easy and was one click off the homepage (it's a link under the 'People' heading). Unfortunately - and surprisingly - I looked all over the Clinton homepage and could not find a link to her LGBT page. 'LGBT' is not mentioned on the "Issues' page, nor was it found under any other heading. Nowhere on her website did I find a link to her views on LGBT issues. That's disappointing. (I also Googled 'Hillary Clinton, LGBT' and found one article from June 2007 archived on her website regarding setting up an LGBT steering committee.)

    Barack Obama - LGBT Homepage:
    http://pride.barackobama.com/page/content/lgbthome

    HIllary Clinton - LGBT Homepage:
    Not Found (please post if found!)

    Posted by: Rob | Feb 27, 2008 11:42:12 PM


  4. Who is this we? Really? Do you want to play the 'who is more exploited and shit on' card? Because as sure as I am that gays have certainly had more than their fair share of being forced to living in the margins, I'm pretty sure we were never enslaved. You don't have to be gay to be part of the group making that change. 'We' are the society that has come a long way, and proof of that is people's bitching. Sixty years ago, you wouldn't be able to.

    For Christ's sake get off the McClurkin bit. How else do you expect change to happen if you can't get over yourself and be in the same room with someone who disagrees with you? That was a rhetorical question, don't answer. I'm stopping shot of insulting anyone's intelligence.

    Posted by: justincredible | Feb 28, 2008 12:14:42 AM


  5. The funny thing about all of this is exactly the reason candidates seek "targeted" advertising – people are willing to vote on a single issue.

    As a gay man, the rights of the LGBT community are indeed very important to me... but they aren't everything when considering a president or any elected official.

    That being said, I am excited to know that our community has grown to the point that we are actually being courted in a presidential election. Feels kind of good!

    Posted by: Jon | Feb 28, 2008 1:03:41 AM


  6. Hey everyone maybe we can make gay marriage a huge issue AGAIN so the Democrats can lose Ohio AGAIN and the Republicans can win the election AGAIN and start a war AGAIN.

    I think we should just sit tight this time around... this bickering over specifics is ridiculous when you consider the bigger picture. The gay marriage debate handed W the White House in 2004 thanks to Ohio.

    Posted by: Maybe | Feb 28, 2008 1:22:19 AM


  7. Dale writes:
    All I've heard from Obama people are the most hurtful insults calling her a witch, an evil bitch, and even a whore dyke. I honestly don't know if I can vote for him considering all the sick Karl Rove like attacks his people have been perpetrating.

    1. Your friends sound like a classy bunch. Well educated and informed, as well.

    2. Please give ONE example of a "sick Karl Rove like attack" that has come from the Obama campaign. I'm not sure your potty mouth friends calling HRC a whore qualifies.

    What did the Clintons ever do except give us don't-ask-don't-tell and DOMA. Actions speak louder than words indeed.

    Posted by: Maybe | Feb 28, 2008 1:30:35 AM


  8. Jon @ 1:03:41
    I liked what you said. I stumbled on this site (no I am not gay, but so?) and was reading the comments, and was quite surprised at the anger at Obama. I understand the Donnie McClurkin situation, but I am frankly surprised. Here is a candidate trying to bring people together (who knows? maybe this big money ad outlay was to try to "atone" for McClurkin), but he is making an effort, and he is not hiding his support for the community. Maybe to a lot of you, his reaching out to the LGBT is a waste because your mind is mind up, but too bad you can't shake someone's hand that is being extended to you.

    Posted by: Sue | Feb 28, 2008 1:48:26 AM


  9. "WE"?!? "US"?!? Who the hell is we and us?

    Posted by: Scot | Feb 28, 2008 2:02:33 AM


  10. I find it a tad funny to segregate a group of people and treat them as some sort of minority, and then ask for their sympathy. I think we have all been smarter in that our decisions in matters as important as finding a president for our country does not solely depend on our color, religion or affiliation.

    I feel that singling out the "gay" community was in itself an act contrary to treating them as equal to everyone. I say that respect and dignity is not something that we receive from other people but something we decide on. One can be subjected to the vilest and most lowly stuff and yet not lose an ounce of respect or dignity one has.

    Posted by: Auto Parts for Brains | Feb 28, 2008 3:35:27 AM


  11. Maybe it's time to realize that neither of these two politicians really give a damn about LGBT issues.

    Maybe it's time to stop letting them treat the community like an ATM.

    Sorry. Silly me. Go back to arguing which is the slightly less evil...

    Posted by: JimDandy | Feb 28, 2008 6:20:19 AM


  12. I think as Democrats and Liberals we need to cool the anger against each other in the Obama vs Clinton issue. At the start of these primaries when we had multiple Democratic Presidential candidates in the field everyones attitude seemed to be any number of these would make for a great President and that they would come together behind who ever was elected or that any one of these would be better than what the Republicans were offering, now that it’s down to two candidates it seems like we’re going to shoot ourselves in the foot for this years election and lose again. Listening to a lot of talk radio people are already stating that if Obama gets elected they’re not voting or if Clinton get elected they’re not voting or even worse that they’re for Ralph Nader which I could never understand since you you’d be pretty much be voting for a Republican.

    Bottom line all of this infighting is NOT going to help the Democratic party, there are plenty of arguments to throw for and against both Obama and Clinton, both have weaknesses and strength, but either would be a million times better for our community and our country than any Republican nominee.

    Thank you

    Posted by: Blakfoxx | Feb 28, 2008 7:52:01 AM


  13. I've tried very hard not to get on the Obama bandwagon (and I'm still not) but once I saw this ad I had to pause for a minute. I was really pleased that he is reaching out to gay America with such an eloquent ad. And thought, maybe he's not so bad after all.

    Then I read these comments - and reread the ad. Obama's words really do ring hollow. He's like the Pied Piper and all the Democrats are falling in behind...but where is he leading us?

    Posted by: WillnDurhamNC | Feb 28, 2008 7:59:10 AM


  14. Okay, this comments area is completely off the charts.

    I think that people who are commenting are not really keeping in mind that this is a national election and that perhaps you need to see that as Obama is becoming the likely nominee that he will be forming the outreach component that will expand his coalition to include gays, lesbians, and transgendered people. If you don't like him in the fall you always have McCain or Nader. It's called a democracy.

    Posted by: Chris in Chicago | Feb 28, 2008 8:07:24 AM


  15. Oh ... ok ... Obama = Bad. So I'll vote for the Clintons so they can throw us under the bus like they did in the 90's. I'll put a little HRC equal sign on my car and feel better about myself.

    Posted by: WMH | Feb 28, 2008 8:09:14 AM


  16. Didn't Mitt Romney take out ads asking for the support of the gay community when he ran against Ted Kennedy? And what is his position on gay rights now? The debate over who will support us more is crazy. Let's band together and support whichever candidate ultimately wins the nomination. We need every vote we can now that jerkwad Nader is back in the race. We cannot let John McCain lead this country.

    Unfortunately, gay people are still the easiest target in the country. Those people who couch themselves as "moral" and "God-loving" can clutch their bibles and talk about how God says homosexuality is wrong. And since such a significant number of voters listen to those religiously-driven people, if gay rights becomes an enormous issue, rest assured we'll see a repeat of 2004.

    Posted by: Larry | Feb 28, 2008 8:25:26 AM


  17. After reading through all the nasty Obama and Clinton comments, it is obvious that John McCain is going to bring equal rights to the gays, he'll probably be the Grand Marshall in Pride Parades and dance at the White Party and hand out condoms and have a lesbian Secretary of the Interior, and so on.

    People need to get through with all of the Democratic bashing soon so they can focus on getting a Democrat in the White House. How old if Supreme Court Justice Stevens? 87? 88?

    Posted by: homer | Feb 28, 2008 8:45:49 AM


  18. this is grade A pandering folks. he sent out flyers in the south about being a "committed christian" to highly religious neighborhoods.
    you can see it here...
    http://bp0.blogger.com/_MnYI3_FRbbQ/R5TrN0RTKFI/AAAAAAAAAfE/OcHrLrst7z4/s1600-h/obama2.png

    if anyone doesn't think that both these candidates will throw us queers under the bus you're kidding yourselves. he'll do it just as the clintons have done.

    i think the most important thing is pushing the house/senate , etc to get the civil unions, enda, etc bills on the desk of a president who will sign them, not veto them. i think both of these candidates would.

    i'll be suprised if any of them takes it up on their own and does something really different than any other politician.

    its a pretty ad, just means he has a clever staff. and the 'we' and 'us' is really eye roll enducing.

    Posted by: mjc | Feb 28, 2008 9:06:34 AM


  19. I can't get over it. I witnessed early in the campaign when Obama was in all the blacl churches with his friend, Donnie McClurkin. This was the gospel circuit Obama was carrying along with his campaign swings. I heard a long talk of McClurkin talking about being saved from the evils of homosexuality, while Obama sat on the side of the stage nodding. This was eary in the cycle, a while ago. BUT, THIS IS HOW HE BEGAN HIS CAMPAIGN. I WILL NEVER FORGIVE HIM FOR IT. DISGUSTING.

    Posted by: glennmcgahee | Feb 28, 2008 9:25:59 AM


  20. Our rights have NEVER been handed to us by a politician.

    NOT A SINGLE ONE!

    We'e won what we have on our own terms. Politcians have been doing nothing but closing the bard door after the hrose won the Kentucky Derby.

    Don't forget that. Ever.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Feb 28, 2008 9:28:35 AM


  21. I am an Obama supporter, but I agree that he hasn't done much if anything at all to support the LGBT community.
    But as stated above, presidents aren't supposed to make laws, that's why we have a Congress.
    He is much less likely to veto civil rights legislation than McCrazy, though.

    Also, I think the "we" he is referring to is the "we as a nation" rather than "we gay folks", but I could be wrong and this is just brazen pandering. Wouldn't surprise me either way, he is a politician after all.

    Posted by: Jason S | Feb 28, 2008 10:45:30 AM


  22. GLENNMCGAHEE, I would be interested in getting more information about what you witnessed. I haven't heard that before. I was under the impression that McClurkin didn't join the Obama campaign until just before the South Carolina fiasco. Can you supply some documentation of these events where Obama appeared live on stage with McClurkin? I was very unhappy about the event in SC but I would be furious if I discovered that it was a part of a pattern rather than just a single event.

    Posted by: Zeke | Feb 28, 2008 10:49:18 AM


  23. Hillary '08

    Posted by: Davey | Feb 28, 2008 10:51:31 AM


  24. I hope you people not voting for the democratic nominee enjoy John McCain and his ultra-right wing, apocalypse chasing friend, John Hagee.

    Because I sure as hell won't.

    Its time the candidates get over themselves, make a deal March 4, whoever's winning the pop/delegate vote wins then and there and then we can get on with this thing. I don't think I can live through the presidency of someone who partners up with a senile, anti-semite, praying and hoping for the second comming of right-wing Jesus Christ!

    If John McCain wins, fuck America, I'm getting out of here.

    Posted by: astonedtemple | Feb 28, 2008 11:20:08 AM


  25. The Clintons and the gay community:

    * DOMA
    * Don't Ask, Don't Tell

    Amazing that so many are clamoring to get f*cked over by these two again. Obama may not be perfect. But at least he's not a habitual backstabber like the Clintons are.

    Posted by: Marc | Feb 28, 2008 11:22:58 AM


  26. « | 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Chad White is Dead and Marilyn Manson is Responsible« «