political ads 2018

The best and worst campaign ads of 2018

The 2018 election cycle has been the most expensive midterm in history, with political candidates spending more than $47 billion. This spending has led to numerous campaign ads online and on TV, some of which have been good, bad, or just plain ugly.

Campaign Ads:

- A great campaign ad cuts across the grain and either shocks or inspires you.

- A good campaign ad can bring attention to candidates that many people may not have noticed otherwise.

- First-time female candidates have captured the most attention in this campaign cycle.

- Female candidates breaking through as authentic and normal human beings are the kind of people that voters want to represent them.

- Many campaign ad duds have come from candidates trying their hand at comedic relief.

- Midterm elections are generally considered referendums on the current president, leading candidates to compare themselves to the president.

- Candidates on both sides have had to walk back their rhetoric after taking it too far in their ads.

- The lessons learned from the 2018 campaign ad gaffes will help parties shape their messaging in 2020.

The 2018 election cycle has been a showcase for campaign ads, with both good and bad examples. First-time female candidates have broken through and captured the most attention, while comedic relief attempts have fallen flat. Candidates comparing themselves to the current president has been a common theme, but going too far in their ads has led to walkbacks. The lessons learned from these gaffes will help parties shape their messaging in future campaigns.

A New Breed of Political Ad Enters the Midterms

The Changing Landscape of Political Advertising

- Political ads have traditionally been short and simple

- Recent changes have allowed for longer, more dramatic ads

- These ads aim to tell personal stories and connect with audiences

Changes in Political Advertising:

- Ultra widescreen ratio and dramatic footage

- Longer ads, often more than four times the length of typical ads

- More personal stories and discussions of difficulties

- Less focus on on-screen text

- Lower cost and fewer regulations on internet ads

Why the Change?

- Cheaper and easier distribution on the internet

- More potential audience on social media

- Lower distribution costs mean more can be spent on production

- Internet ads subject to fewer regulations

Do These Ads Work?

- Some raise over a million dollars and reach a national audience

- Unknown candidates can gain media coverage and attention

- More of these ads are being produced and distributed

- Political advertising is changing, with longer, more personal ads becoming more common

- The internet and social media are driving these changes, with lower distribution costs and fewer regulations

- While the effectiveness of these ads is still being studied, they offer candidates new ways to connect with voters and tell their stories.

The Craziest Campaign Ads of 2018

Every election year, Americans are bombarded with campaign ads. However, the 2018 midterms saw some surprisingly entertaining ads that captured the attention of the public.

Entertaining Ads:

1. Deportation Bus Ad for Michael Williams: A governor candidate in Georgia had an ad that featured a deportation bus.

2. Rhonda Santos, Florida Governor Candidate: A candidate from Florida taught his daughter how to build a wall using blocks.

3. Vitesse, Indiana House of Representatives Candidate: A candidate used a rap-style ad to get attention.

4. Richard Painter, Minnesota Senate Candidate: A serious ad that addressed the current political climate.

5. Dan Helmer, Virginia House of Representatives Candidate: A cringe-worthy ad that used a Top Gun theme.

6. Kyle Greene, Minnesota State Representative Candidate: An ad that used a controversial word to grab attention.

7. Levi Tillman, Colorado Congress Candidate: A candidate pepper sprayed himself in the face to promote school safety.

While some of these ads may seem unconventional, they certainly caught the attention of the public. Whether serious or funny, each ad had a unique approach to reaching voters.

Georgia Voters React To 2018 Midterms Ads (HBO)

In this article, we will be analyzing and summarizing the reactions of a focus group to several political advertisements.

Key Points:

- Music is used to gauge the effectiveness of political advertisements in a focus group.

- A good advertisement should score 80-85 on a zero to 100 dial.

- Most advertisements score 35-40.

- The first advertisement analyzed is for Stacey Abrams, who is running for governor in Georgia.

- The advertisement emphasizes Southern traditions, family, and faith.

- The group is divided on whether or not they believe Abrams will follow through on her promises.

- The second advertisement is for Brian Kemp, also running for governor in Georgia.

- The advertisement features Kemp with a shotgun and emphasizes his support for the Second Amendment.

- The group finds the advertisement politically incorrect and off-putting.

- The third advertisement is for Lucy McBath, a Democrat running for Congress in Georgia.

- The advertisement emphasizes McBath's immigrant background and hard work.

- The group is divided on whether or not McBath's immigrant status is relevant to the advertisement.

- The fourth advertisement is for Richard Ojeda, a Democrat running for Congress in West Virginia.

- The advertisement emphasizes Ojeda's anger and his commitment to fighting for the people of his district.

- The group finds the advertisement appealing to both Democrats and Republicans.

- The fifth advertisement is for Future 45, a conservative super PAC.

- The advertisement is characterized as divisive and inciting violence by the focus group.

- The group is divided on whether or not the advertisement is appropriate.

The focus group's reactions to these political advertisements reveal the importance of messaging, tone, and authenticity in political campaigns. While some advertisements are more effective than others, it is clear that political advertisements have a significant impact on voters' perceptions and decision-making.

The greatest political ad of all time?

The Georgia political scene has been buzzing with ads for months, with both sides attacking each other's credibility. The AJC reported a possible felony by Stacey Abrams, while Brian Kemp has been labeled as untrustworthy. However, in the midst of all this, one of the greatest political commercials in Georgia's history has been overlooked. This article will explore the story of how Nathan Deal used a clever political trick to win his primary runoff against Tom Ramsey in 1992.

The Story:

- Nathan Deal, a state legislator, was running for Congress against fellow Democrat Tom Ramsey in 1992.

- Ramsey had enough campaign money to buy 30 minutes of airtime on a Chattanooga TV station two days before the primary runoff.

- Deal's media consultant came up with a plan to buy 30 seconds of commercial time immediately before Ramsey's infomercial.

- Instead of a traditional political ad, Deal's commercial was 30 seconds of tone bars and a thousand Hertz phone tone, giving the impression that the TV station was off the air.

- This brilliantly simple and cold-blooded political trick diverted attention away from Ramsey's infomercial.

- The commercial was so effective that people tuned in to watch Ramsey's infomercial, only to see the tone bars instead.

- In the end, Deal won the primary runoff and went on to serve nine terms in Congress.

Nathan Deal's political trick of using tone bars and a phone tone to undercut his opponent's infomercial was a stroke of genius. It was a unique approach that diverted attention away from Ramsey's message without being mean or vindictive. In hindsight, it was a pretty darn good political trick, and it helped propel Deal's career as one of Georgia's best-known politicians.

Campaign 2018 - The political ads

TV ads for political candidates are everywhere, making various promises and criticizing their opponents. But are these ads accurate? Matthew Kaufman, the fact checker for The Hartford Courant, joins us to discuss.

Rankings of Ads:

- True

- Generally Accurate

- Somewhat Misleading

- Significantly Misleading

- False

Accuracy of Ads:

- No ads have been completely true or false

- Most ads fall within the middle categories

- There have been cases of shading language and misleading statements, but nothing significantly false

- Last season had more contentious races, but we may see more after the primary

Misleading Claims:

- Ads that suggest something that is not quite incorrect but will make the viewer think something else

- Examples include suggesting a candidate did not vote for a certain party or candidate when they did not vote at all

- Misdeeds by a company happened before a candidate was involved, but the ad suggests otherwise

- Ads using a fact and inserting buzzwords to impact voters

Legal Recourse:

- Virtually no recourse for candidates to take action against false ads

- TV stations cannot turn down political ads

- Defamation lawsuits can be brought, but the standards are high for public figures

- Rebuttal ads have been seen in the past

Political ads can be misleading and use shading language to impact voters. Candidates have limited legal recourse against false ads, and TV stations cannot turn them down. Rebuttal ads have been used in the past.