Campaign ad analysis

1.) He tells information about himself while using many other beliefs and virtues he possesses by enforcing the more touching words used in Obama's campaign against McCain in 2008;
This method was very effective because it drew the viewers attentions on who Obama is and what he wanted to seem like appose to just a politician. The ad makes him sound sincere and virtuous that he is the proper person to lead the country.

http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2008


2.) The 1980 election of Ronald Reagan showed his accomplishments as the mayor of CA in a time of debt:
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1980
I found that this would be an effective ad because there was a very strong and confident man behind this campaign who had extremely important experiance.


3.)The very eye catching and horrific images of chaos, riots, and fighting were used in Nixon's campaign against Humphrey and Wallace in 1968 election.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1968
Although it wasn't as effective as it could have been, it definately was attention grabbing, but it didn't look too specifically good for just him... which can be taken a few ways.

4.) Bush's 2004 campaign ad against John Kerry, which focused on overcome problems (or so it seemed).

http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2004

The ad was very intriguingly effective to me because not only was it from a time where i was paying attention to the election but it mentioned the 9/11/01 accident which was handled by Bush and showed how he could use a touchy subject to his advantage.

5.) There was more of  a threatening vibe to Johnson's campaign against Goldwater in 1964;

With the American fear of a nuclear attack at this time, making a commercial with an atomic bomb detenation, will 'persuade' people to vote for Johnson's side; showing the ads effectiveness.

http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1964

6.) Clinton and Gore's campaign ad which adressed the importance of a change for this newly thinking Democratic party.

This ad wasn't very good at all, i was at first confused with who exactly the ad supported and I feel as if the ad was also not supporting very logical or strong points.. i'm not sure how they got so many votes..http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1992

3 assertions:

1.) Many presidents have set trends with good ads in the past, but these trends never last because somehow they either get old or have  become ineffective.

2.) A good ad is obviously something which will appeal to the majority and get the most amount of support for one side's campaign.

3.) With satisfying a majority, a smaller amount of people will be disapointed by an ad or ideology of the candidate, which is why some presidents candidates would turn to "trash talking" other compitition.