I had to watch the 2004 democrat campaign ads and my favorite was “State of the Union…Not Good.” They took edited clips of George Bush to make him say horrible things and then inserted clips of the crowd cheering for him. For example, they took a clip of him saying “I am committed to defeating the good work of charities and the values that bring lasting peace,” and then the crowd starts applauding him. I liked this ad the best because thought it was really funny and it caught me off guard since it did not have the serious tone that most of the other ads had.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2004/state-of-the-union-not-good-web
I also enjoyed the ad titled “The Coalition of Loudmouth Jerks” which showed clips of democrats saying bad stuff about George Bush and then the narrator said, “but when democrats say mean things about the president, it makes the president sad.” Then it followed with a montage of sad music and somber clips of George Bush looking out of a window and then had a picture of George Bush with an edited teardrop that ran down his face. I thought this montage and edited teardrop part was really funny since I don’t normally think of campaign ads including humor in them.
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/2004/the-coalition-of-loudmouthed-jerks-web
I also thought the 2004 ad was funny, but questioned its effectiveness. It almost left me disliking the people endorsing it even more than Bush because of how ridiculous and fake it seemed. Almost made them seem like the stupid ones. I think serious tones are much more effective.
I don’t really like the cutting of words together to appear to create new sentences. I think that it undermines the intelligence of the electorate. I don’t know if someone would actually be persuaded by this type of ad.
I did not see the word cutting ad, but I have to say it sounds like a little bit of a weird strategy. It would definitely catch me off guard as well, but also question the integrity of the candidate who made this against the other candidate. Why not just show video clips of Bush’s mistakes in a more succinct, intelligent way?
I think that having a humorous side can entice viewers because it’s so different from typical political ads, but I agree that it brings into question its effectiveness if it does not address anything policy-wise, etc.
I think that ads which implore humor or comedy are some of the best as they certainly stand out compared to all of the attack ads or boring ads about policy and definitely make an impression on voters. I also think it is interesting that Bush chose to use this strategy as I do not really associate him with comedy.