I was assigned the year 1988 and out of all the ads, the one that stood out to me the most was called “Willie Horton”.
In the ad (paid by National Security PAC) attacked presidential candidate Dukakis on crime. It begins by stating, “Bush and Dukakis on crime” and then makes it clear that Bush supports the death penalty. The remainder of the thirty-second video is dedicated to explain that Dukakis’ support of weekend passes using one example of how this policy turned deadly.
While this ad is incredibly direct in attacking policies of a candidate, it stood out to me as the most effective in turning an audience away from a candidate. The use of the example equates Dukakis with the actions of Willie Horton (a murderer that committed more crimes using the weekend pass) and shows how Dukakis isn’t qualified to be president. Even if this fact could be debunked, the association of Dukakis with Horton would not be easily erased. Also, the use of very little words draws attention to the specific associations needed to not support Dukakis.
It was my favorite in the sense that it was the most shocking and smartest use of few words, one example and reiterating a single message. Dukakis = Weak on crime
This ad is definitely striking and effective. Through this ad Bush is able to both play up racial tensions and Americans fear of crime (especially white Americans fear of perceived black criminals) in a 30 second ad without ever saying any of those words. It’s amazing the impact such a short ad can have on an entire campaign.
This ad is really disturbingly effective. It is short and paints Dukakis as a “supporter” of crime. But it also plays on the “War on Crime, or war or drugs” that Bush was focused on (which we look at now as a way to incarcerate and imprison black men). This ad, as Charlotte said above, heightens the “racial tensions and fear of crime” that pervaded much of this time period. This ad also heightens these issues more (I believe) especially because the ad is so short and really gets to the point indirectly.