A Tale of Two Ads

Below is one of Barack Obama's new attack ads. Some of the liberal blogosphere say it's his harshest ad so far. These bloggers are happy to see this new toughness. I say he has to do better.



It's a good ad, but just exactly who does it win over? It gets people who already support him, like me, to nod their heads. Other than this group, this isn't exactly a water cooler discussion starter. Believe it or not, but that blue collar guy who could put Obama over the top in Virginia doesn't care what Time magazine or any of the other media outlets quoted in the ad think.

Below is an ad from moveon.org. I believe it is that organization's first attack, and I think it's better than the Obama ad.




What's the difference between the two ads? The first ad is more targeted to the head and rational thought processes, and the second ad is targeted to the gut and the heart.

Obama doesn't need to win over thoughtful and rational people -- these well-meaning people (on both sides, by the way) already know who they're voting for. And such an appeal to the intellect didn't do John Kerry, Al Gore or Michael Dukakis much good.

He needs to win over people's passions, touch their hearts, make them laugh, make them mad. He needs to give them something they'll talk about at work the next day or at the family dinner table that night. Has anybody seen this ad so far in the election cycle? I haven't. And if Obama can come up with *that* message, he'll win.

This campaign will be won if Obama is passionate, not if he's dispassionate and professorial.

His passion will win him the election, and his dispassion will make him the president that America deserves.

***

(Coming later this week: I'll flesh out my earlier passing thoughts on why I think Obama will lose the election if it's close, but if he wins, he'll win big. I still feel this way. More later.)