Pre-Super Tuesday Political Ad Assault

Now that the focus is on the many state primaries held on next Tuesday, February 5, the political campaigns are spending money on advertising in those states. Which means we get to see those ads in here in New York, as many delegates are up for grabs. We haven't seen any ads from the Republican candidates (perhaps realizing spending ad money in blue-city NYC is an expensive and not very cost-effective solution) yet but we have seen ads from Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Clinton's ad (above) emphasizes her NY Times' endorsement.

Obama's ad (above) features Caroline Kennedy speaking about how Obama fulfills the promise of change.

Which ad do you think is more effective?

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on January 31, 2008 10:01 AM

Comments [rss]

Toby von Meistersinger

Rodney, thanks for getting my point.

I don't support Ron Paul, but I do admire him for saying things that he actually seems to believe in instead of some sort of Stepford politico script. True he is a wacko, but he comes across as more genuine than anyone else.

rodney

Toby, you'd support Ron Paul--who doesn't believe in evolution--over Obama? Sure Paul has a lot of good things to say about privacy and upholding the constitution but he is kind of a wacko.

UMNomad

The only person who is running that actually makes any sense is Ron Paul, who of course has a zero percent chance of winning.

You're right about him having a zero chance of winning, but that hypocrite does not make sense.

cardio

Huckabee is actually running adds as well. I saw one last night. He was talking up his conservative cred. by saying he'd do away with the IRS.

linesandcurves

The only leading candidate that was actually different dropped out yesterday. I guess if we're picking one of the two, I hope people will see through the BS of Hilary. The Obama ad does make you feel hopeful and fuzzy, hopefully he'll turn it into action as opposed to empty blanket slogans.

linesandcurves

The only leading candidate that was actually different dropped out yesterday. I guess if we're picking one of the two, I hope people will see through the BS of Hilary. The Obama/JFK ad does make you feel hopeful and fuzzy, hopefully he'll turn it into action as opposed to empty blanket slogans.

Toby von Meistersinger

Neither in making me want to vote for either of them. All these do is make me not like both of them more and think that the idea of President Bloomberg doesn't sound all that bad.

They both come off as what they are phony career politicians. Hillary seems like she is acting and Obama seems to be doing a JFK impression. It is very off putting. My only bias here is against phony career politicians and I'd be saying this regardless of the race or gender of the hacks.

I'd vote for Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale or Mike Dukakis over any of the current crop of clowns from either party. The only person who is running that actually makes any sense is Ron Paul, who of course has a zero percent chance of winning.

MisterTissue

Obama's. C'mon, JFK is a goldmine of warm feelings. The NY Times endorsement of Clinton is nowhere near as surprising as JFK's own daughter comparing Obama to JFK.