What exactly is wrong with this ad?
It accurately states that Ed Markey supports an assault weapons ban and limiting the size of magazines, the “kind used in the Newtown shooting”; and that Gomez does not.
Gomez is now complaining, “Markey blames me for the horrific Newtown shooting”. Garbage. It does no such thing. The ad is as simple and decent as a contrast ad can be: “I believe this. My opponent believes that. You have a choice.”
It does amply demonstrate that Gomez holds an unpopular position among MA voters — and one whose consequences are unfortunately fresh in our memories.
You know, Mr. Gomez, no one is making you take that position. If you think that an accurate description of your position makes you look bad … well, only you can fix that.
Straightforward, honest, uses Gomez’s own words to set forth his position. No inaccuracies that I can spot. Very well done.
Gomez just looks silly when he says the ad blames him for Newtown. It just says, “here’s a potential legislative response to the gun problem and Gomez opposes it.” The words are right from his own mouth.
If Mr. Gomez doesn’t like ads like this, he needs to rethink either his positions or his decision to seek this office.
This is a calm, low-key, and deadly accurate summary of an important difference between the two candidates. Mr. Markey shows clips of Mr. Gomez opposing gun control just last March — Mr. Gomez was already in the campaign, and surely knew his positions were unpopular with those who care about stopping the epidemic of gun violence.
Now, Mr. Gomez can’t even find the courage to stand up and defend his position. Instead, he whines.
According to the small claims court records and lawsuit for payment. Perhaps he is a “victim Republican” who uses fake outrage for political gain. Small children also are legendary for their use of this tactic.
that he would get so unhinged so quickly. We’re used to this sort of behavior in MA Republican candidates’ lackey (*coughEriccough*) but this is pretty…well, frankly, amateur. And this sort of waaaaah victim! attitude plays very poorly for a candidate who is largely undefined in the minds of even many of the diehard voters who show up to special elections.
RMG must be collectively beating their heads on walls right now.
the sarcasm doesn’t work as well when you screw up the grammar. Supposed to be “We’re used to this sort of behavior in MA Republican candidates’ lackeys (*coughEriccough*)”…
Quote from their endorsement of Michael Sullivan.
“the editors” keep saying “Democrat nominee” or “Democrat Massachusetts” because they’re inept or ignorant?
It’s Democratic nominee and Democratic Massachusetts.
I would never call the Republican Party the Republic Party, or Alabama “Republic Alabama.”
They’ve been doing this for 30 years to make the Democratic Party sound bad. The ever-generous Charlie Cook thinks younger Republicans do it because they’ve never heard it said any other way.
Proper Grammar is something only adult level humans care about, which leaves out all the GOP babies.
It is however poor syntax and contrary to what the party calls itself. Also a person is a Democrat while the party is Democratic while on the other side both are Republican.
It’s about respect. Any Republican who’s done this in the public spotlight knows exactly what they’re doing, and shows a complete and utter lack of respect. I think that’s bad for America, and reflects very poorly on the Republican Party as a whole.
Plus, every time I hear it, my brain expects — and needs — those other two letters, because they’re supposed to be there. It flows better with them. I cringe inside my head every time I see or read it the wrong way, much as I would when someone scratches a chalkboard — or even thinking about someone scratching a chalkboard.
We should all agree that we can respect each other enough that we can at least not be dicks. Saying “Democrat Party” fails that test. Maybe we should call Rob Eno “Robbypooh” and see how he likes it, because that displays approximately the same level of maturity as he did in his endorsement.
Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in the New Yorker, “There’s no great mystery about the motives behind this deliberate misnaming. ‘Democrat Party’ is a slur, or intended to be—a handy way to express contempt. Aesthetic judgments are subjective, of course, but ‘Democrat Party’ is jarring verging on ugly. It fairly screams ‘rat.'”
And this is the level of discourse we get from these guys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
Though there are several things listed, the one I’ve always heard is that it was started because of the fear by the opposition that word Democratic (“big D”) would be conflated with “little d” democratic.
The wiki article states “Ruth Marcus stated that Republicans likely only continue to employ the term because Democrats dislike it.” — there’s probably some truth to that, besides the fact that it’s childish name calling without using a childish name…examples from our side are the use of “Repuglican” etc – except, Nancy Pelosi doesn’t use that term, and no elected official I ever heard of uses it, whereas W Bush used it all the time and so does half (or more) of the nationally elected members of the Republican party.
Personally, I find it a lot less offensive than, say, the use of the word “macaca,” but all of that comes from the same impulse from a certain set of personality and brain type, mostly from a certain party, at least these days.
My conservative/libertarian co host for my college radio program would use it, he claimed he thought that’s what we were called. I corrected him on sir enough times that he stopped, I wish liberal pundits would do that on DC shows. Of course liberals haven’t stood up for themselves since LBJ.
Really solid spot. Zero clutter. Zero gimmicks. Excellent tag line to drive the message home
Clear. Simple. Uses the Republicans OWN media appearances clearly and distinctly and against him. Absolute un-ambiguous with a capital CLEARLY.
Markey has powerful kung fu. Pure and simple. Gomez still trying to figure out what hit him…
It’s pretty even toned. It doesn’t yell. The gun that is shooting doesn’t have any sound to shock the viewer into watching. It doesn’t even say something like, ‘It is absolutely shameful that the GOP has blocked basic gun control efforts in the wake of numerous recent tragedies, including Newtown. Gabriel Gomez would join the GOP in blocking the will of 90% of Americans.” It kind of says that, but doesn’t really dig in. It just says, hey, here’s my position, here’s Gomez’s. Get it? That’s like the least negative “negative” ad I’ve ever seen; it’s pure comparison. It really bothers me that the headlines are that Markey has “gone negative.” He HASN’T gone negative. He’s made a REALLY TAME comparison piece on an actual issue.
By the way, awhile back I made a crack about how Gomez keeps saying he’s not a politician. If he really wants to become a US Senator without becoming a politician in the process, he fundamentally doesn’t understand how this works. I bet he’s thinking that this ad is really unfair, really negative. If he’s whining because he thinks THIS (really tame, really even handed ad) is hardball politics, then he’s got even thinner skin than Scott Brown.
As in “look at that DC elitist picking on a regular non-politician like you and me.”
I think this is what Gomez genuinely doesn’t get. And many other right-wing people. Either that, or they know it’s wrong and did it anyway.
Last I checked, not too many people win elections with “WAAAH! My opponent just PICKED ON ME!”
Seems like Republicans want to paint Dems as wusses all the time, but cry like tiny, tiny babies when someone dares to throw the simplest and most obvious political attack at them.
I mean, how could Gomez possibly expect his recorded stance on gun control (or rather, lack of gun control) NOT to come into play, when Markey plastered the airwaves with his strong take on the matter, in his own primary??
No, this is the desperate and poor attempt at spinning because Gomez knows his actual position is deeply unpopular here and does not play with more than the lonely island that is the Republican base in this state.
In my view, an “attack” is something like “Joe Blow is a traitor and terrorist because Joe Blow says …” (followed by some highly provocative and probably misquoted phrase).
There’s no attack in this ad. The message of the ad: “The more you know, the clearer your choice”. In my view, this is no “attack”. This ad should actually help the relative handful of people who oppose gun control (presumably those who Mr. Gomez was speaking to in the two quoted excerpts) — and who apparently represent the GOP “base” in Massachusetts.
Your last paragraph is precisely correct and is the real “attack” — Mr. Gomez has taken a position at odds with the overwhelming majority of Massachusetts residents. In my view, there is no “attack” in making sure that as many voters as possible are aware of that reality.
I was just trying to suggest what might be going on.
Isn’t that what the plumber is thinking?
Negative is implying your opponent is a scary black man making your walk in a darkened car garage unsafe.
Comparing your position to the known, RECORDED position of your opponent is POLITICS, last I checked. Pretty much the same as a freaking debate. Especially when said opponent’s position is not distorted in any way, nor even cherry picked, but literally what he himself said.
SOOO sick of these stupid, attention-grabbing, ratings-transfixed sort of headlines. Lazy media hacks, please learn the freaking difference…when someone really goes negative, you’ll know. Unless you have a cabbage for a head.
(See what I did there? I just went negative on the media.)
And say that this isn’t just “not negative” in the sense that it’s not like the scary black man ads of Horton or the garage ad from 2006. This is way beyond that. This isn’t even negative in the sense of not actually filling in the blank. He could have made the point that Gabriel Gomez doesn’t support basic basic gun control laws, the GOP has been blocking gun control and that’s why violence in Boston and many other MA cities is going up. He could have said something like, “Gabriel Gomez doesn’t care about your safety.” Or something. That would be negative – a negative statement about the opponent that is an opinion based on a position, not a fact.
This ad didn’t even do that. This ad doesn’t even REALLY make the case that gun control is good and that opponents of it are bad. It really just says that Markey supports it/has taken on the NRA and Gomez doesn’t/hasn’t. There seems to be a basic understanding that anybody who is going to bother to vote on June 25th already has formulated an opinion on gun control.
So this isn’t just far removed from a Swiftboat thing in that it’s true – it doesn’t even fully make the case. Not to mention how sensationalistic it isn’t! It’s just downright boring.
Consider this ad on gun control, by comparison:
(warning: there is a loud shot made in the video)
This is a much, much more sensationalist and I would say downright scary way to make an important point. What Ed created isn’t just factually accurate, isn’t just not negative, isn’t just not ad hominem, it’s downright boring and muted.
Here is the link to the ad mentioned.
http://youtu.be/LORVfnFtcH0
Scott Brown and his minions –including his daughters — came out with a full court press accusing Martha Coakley of going negative and the press picked it up and ran with it as if it were fact.
But what Coakley had done is to bring out some facts about Brown, facts that remind us about leopards and their spots: http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/coakley_campaig_1.html
It worked for him against Coakley, even though he was making up ludicrous charges about her that had no basis in fact, such as saying “She’ll raise your taxes by $2.1 Billion.”
Brown tried pretty much the same tactic against EW but she countered by hammering him on his votes and no amount of daughters could change that record.
Now, things Gomez has said and done are all we have to go on since he has no voting record. Call me crazy, but if that’s negative then it’s negative. Just don’t call me Mr. Malarky
I have any reaction to Gomez’s whining other than laughter. Gomez’s only hope here is that we are surrounded by voters who don’t bother to do their homework and fall for garbage like that.