Video: Mitt’s painfully generic new campaign ad

posted at 4:25 pm on June 19, 2007 by Allahpundit

He’s putting the third leg on that “three-legged stool,” writes Chris Cillizza. He’s also putting me to sleep. Does everyone understand the situation here? We’re getting beat, badly, in the humor primary by Hillary Clinton. Mitt’s looking to raise his name recognition, (presumably) eager to show the Mormon-haters that he’s not the stodgy caricature they’d like him to be, and brimming with campaign cash to make it happen. Why not do a Hillary-esque lighter-side ad (provided it’s not 13 minutes, of course)? He could run them in battleground states in tandem with the serious policy ads so that people don’t come to think of him as a lightweight. Throw a couple hundred grand at David Zucker and let Mittmania sweep through the grassroots.

You know who I blame? Dean Barnett. Just because.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Wha, huh? Did plastic man say something?

SouthernDem on June 19, 2007 at 4:35 PM

He looks tired. The chase to catch Fred! seems to be wearing on him.

ScottG on June 19, 2007 at 4:36 PM

Conservatives without humor, is that what you’re saying? I’ll admit wearing a pencil neck suit and not a relaxed untucked shirt in front of a bowl of carrots does offer a bit of stiffness (no Trojan pun intended).

But what do you want the guy to do? If Rodney Dangerfield was still around, he’d know what to do to add a little funny to the Mormon question.

Kini on June 19, 2007 at 4:39 PM

I’ll be happy to laugh at Hillary and take Mitt seriously. I like the message: too big, too big, and too much. Check, check, and check. But do agree some lighter stuff mixed in would help.

Spirit of 1776 on June 19, 2007 at 4:42 PM

Yeah, we can’t be losing laughs to The Glacier. That’s not good. Hopefully Fred or Rudy can bring teh funneh. Mitt doesn’t seem to be doing so.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 4:46 PM

I agree with the message he’s conveying, but people just aren’t going to pay attention to this ad.

amerpundit on June 19, 2007 at 4:46 PM

allah’s right – I blame myself.

Dean Barnett on June 19, 2007 at 4:51 PM

Mitt’s an also ran in this field and the only thing about that that makes me smile is the fact that its going to make that smug prick, Hugh “Solid B+” Hewitt look stupid.

Fred on June 19, 2007 at 4:54 PM

Did that sound harsh? Should have said “goofball”.

Fred on June 19, 2007 at 4:58 PM

Hugh “Solid B+” Hewitt

Heh. I listen to him on Thursdays for Steyn and Lileks, but it’s hard to take him seriously because he is like a lobbyist. He is not particularly objective and really makes some of his interviews very difficult listening.

Spirit of 1776 on June 19, 2007 at 5:02 PM

The 2 candidates need to accomplish different goals (Romney and Clinton). Mitt wants to convince people he is a true believer on Republican issues. He wants to be straight forward and tell people he stands where they stand (if you are a Republican). Hillary wants to convince people she isn’t a humorless witch. She wants to bring up her “likeability” quotient. Mitt is likeable already so he doesn’t have to spend us much energy in that area. Not all candidates need to focus on the same things.

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Mitt’s an also ran in this field and the only thing about that that makes me smile is the fact that its going to make that smug prick, Hugh “Solid B+” Hewitt look stupid.

Checked out the recent polling in Iowa and NH recently? Not that the first two primary states actually matter.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 5:14 PM

Throw a couple hundred grand at David Zucker and let Mittmania sweep through the grassroots.

Why won’t someone do that already?

Mitt can do a “Big Love” parody and get it all out in the open.

Esthier on June 19, 2007 at 5:16 PM

Mitt can do a “Big Love” parody and get it all out in the open.

Esthier on June 19, 2007 at 5:16 PM

I’d hire Bill Paxton and Chloë Sevigny for cameos in a funny online ad for Mitt. It would be a guaranteed million downloads.

Alas, that won’t ever happen.

ScottMcC on June 19, 2007 at 5:23 PM

God that was horrible.
I kept waiting for Mitt to break into the horrible background muzak and offer us the opportunity to by his life-transforming package for only 4 easy payments of $29.95.

Have the producers of this spot not seen an infomercial?

unamused on June 19, 2007 at 5:35 PM

It’s be great if he joked around with the Mormon issue.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 5:35 PM

Allah’s right – I blame myself.

Dean Barnett on June 19, 2007 at 4:51 PM

I question the timing.

That was the most boring commercial I have seen since Hush Puppy stopped selling shoes.

Jaibones on June 19, 2007 at 5:47 PM

That was the most boring commercial I have seen since Hush Puppy stopped selling shoes.

Jaibones on June 19, 2007 at 5:47 PM

What??!!! Checking….. Whew! No, Hush Puppies still exist. And they’re haram too, or they at least used to be made of pigskin….

ScottG on June 19, 2007 at 6:00 PM

Checked out the recent polling in Iowa and NH recently? Not that the first two primary states actually matter.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 5:14 PM

Yes, he’s demonstrated that he’s been able to increase his polling numbers in Iowa and NH by throwing money into these states with absurdly early campaign ads.

Looks like he strategy is to focus his efforts on a few early voting states to gain support there in a last ditch effort to prop up his weak national numbers by making appear more electable in the primary. Might work, but probably not- has anyone else even started running campaign ads yet?

Hollowpoint on June 19, 2007 at 6:03 PM

He’s the former governor of TAXachusetts, and sees that as the first hurdle to overcome. So he has no choice but to try and convince his audience that he’s for lower taxes and less government spending. And a big hurdle it is ::coughBIGDIGcough::

Freelancer on June 19, 2007 at 6:04 PM

Looks like he strategy is to focus his efforts on a few early voting states to gain support there in a last ditch effort to prop up his weak national numbers by making appear more electable in the primary.

Last ditch effort? Um, you do realize that we are so early in the campaign that the leading Republican candidate hasn’t even officially entered the race, right?

What he is doing, and has been doing since day 1, is focusing on the early states that actually matter and doing it quite effectively. He doesn’t have a hollywood career or a national tragedy to run on so he is going to actual voters and telling them who he is.

And the reason he is throwing out money with early campaign ads is because he has gobs of it. Go figure, the leading money raisier is an also ran.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 6:12 PM

He’s the former governor of TAXachusetts, and sees that as the first hurdle to overcome. So he has no choice but to try and convince his audience that he’s for lower taxes and less government spending. And a big hurdle it is ::coughBIGDIGcough::

Freelancer on June 19, 2007 at 6:04 PM

Be fair Freelancer. As a resident of TAXachusetts Romney was able to reduce taxes and at the same time balance the budget. If not for him we would be far worse off then we are now. Before Romney was elected Gov the state was in financial crisis. The liberal legislature here is the problem and our Senators are a disgrace as everyone knows. The Big Dig had nothing to do with Romney and as Governer he should never have had anything to do with it. He was forced to step in and fix the situation when things litterally started falling apart and killing people. He risked his political career by doing so but did it because he knew some serious changes needed to be made. I think the way he handled it was a microcosm of his time as Governer here.

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 6:35 PM

Looks like he strategy is to focus his efforts on a few early voting states to gain support there in a last ditch effort to prop up his weak national numbers by making appear more electable in the primary. Might work, but probably not- has anyone else even started running campaign ads yet?

Hollowpoint on June 19, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Not to mention the fact that we don’t have a national election. That might have something to do with it too I think.

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 6:36 PM

Freelancer on June 19, 2007 at 6:04 PM

To be fair, I’m pretty sure the Big Dig was something Romney inherited from the previous governor. Also, he was able to take MA from a huge budget deficit to a budget surplus by slashing unnecessary programs and NOT raising taxes.

Any politician that has the balls to go to a hard core liberal state and say “money’s not the problem. We’ve got plenty of money. Spending on stupid stuff is the problem.” is a guy that I’m interested in hearing more about.

JadeNYU on June 19, 2007 at 6:38 PM

Last ditch effort? Um, you do realize that we are so early in the campaign that the leading Republican candidate hasn’t even officially entered the race, right?

What he is doing, and has been doing since day 1, is focusing on the early states that actually matter and doing it quite effectively.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 6:12 PM

“States that actually matter?” Oh boy… tell that to McCain, who slaughtered Bush in the 2000 NH (then the first state to vote) primaries, only to get trounced?

OK, maybe it’s not quite a “last ditch” effort, but he’s going to have to do a lot more than buy early support in IA and NH if he’s to overcome numbers that went from 8-9%, peaked at 16%, then dropped back down to 10%- especially given Thompson’s strong showing in NC, where FlipFlop Mitt remains at 11%, especially with Thompsons numbers steadily rising as he gets national exposure.

In terms of campaigning, Flipper Mitt is essentially running unopposed in IA and NH at the moment- his numbers are unlikely to hold as the primaries draw nearer, especially when Iowans learn that Mitt’s a gun-grabber- something you’re OK with, but a lot of Iowa Republicans won’t be.

Yes, it’s early with plenty of time for poll numbers to change dramatically- but hey, you started it.

Hollowpoint on June 19, 2007 at 6:45 PM

To be fair, I’m pretty sure the Big Dig was something Romney inherited from the previous governor. Also, he was able to take MA from a huge budget deficit to a budget surplus by slashing unnecessary programs and NOT raising taxes.

Actually, he inherited it from Ted Kennedy. It was a federal program, not a state one. It has been going on for almost 20 years. I know because I was living in the Back Bay when this monstrosity was beginning and I moved because of all the disruption and rats. Yea, rats. And yes, he lowered taxes and balanced budgets and left a surplus. And the highly partisan left wing MA State House detests him. That alone ought to give you the warm and fuzzies about him.

This is exactly why Romney is getting out early. Even people who claim they are political junkies on the right side have no clue about his record.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 6:46 PM

HP-

We can go back and forth on this endlessly. I can point out to you that not only is Mitt not a gun grabber ( he is at best apathetic about guns ) but he actually expanded gun rights in MA. I can prove that his rhetoric on abortion is essentially the same as Freds was, until Fred flip flopped and so are their voting records. I can prove to you that he lowered taxes. I can prove to you that he and Rudy are the only two Republicans with executive experience. I can also show you that no Senator has been elected President since John Kennedy more than 40 years ago. And I can absolutely prove that no politician in the country has fought harder against gay marriage than Romney. I’m told thats a big issue for conservatives. But I am not going to change your mind.

When Fred gets in the race and actually has to debate, without a script, and defend his record which everyone seems willing to give him a pass on so far, lets see how the numbers play out.

JackStraw on June 19, 2007 at 6:56 PM

ScottMcC on June 19, 2007 at 5:23 PM

Not just Bill Paxton and Chloe Sevigny, but the other wives, too. Just a simple spot of them sitting around the dining room table, arguing about whom to vote for, newspapers spread all over which they go through as they talk. Barb would argue for Hillary, Margene would argue for Obama (“He looks cool”, followed by “Be quiet, Margene” from Nicki). Nicki could argue for Rudy.

Then finally Bill would speak up, and tell them all they’re all crazy, there’s only one man in the race who supports hard working Americans like themselves: John McCain.

Then Margene looks down at the newspapers and says “Hey, did you guys know Mitt Romney is a Mormon?” They all kind of look at each other and say “Romney it is” in unison.

Hmm, maybe that would work better as an Edwards or Fred! commercial.

corbettw on June 19, 2007 at 7:21 PM

I saw more emotion in Abe Lincoln face at Disneyworld’s Hall of Presidents.

Joshua P. Allem on June 19, 2007 at 7:55 PM

Not just Bill Paxton and Chloe Sevigny, but the other wives, too… Hmm, maybe that would work better as an Edwards or Fred! commercial.

corbettw on June 19, 2007 at 7:21 PM

Yeah, it does.

If you have Paxton and Sevigny as a cameo, it must have rolled eyes from Mitt and his wife.

ScottMcC on June 19, 2007 at 8:52 PM

Mitts! video was pretty good. Hillary’s was an attempt to fix her image.

I wouldn’t worry too much about Mitts! ads. He is the guy waiting in the weeds. Slowly, methodically, and effectively getting his message out.

Mitt is clearly the class of the field.

csdeven on June 19, 2007 at 9:28 PM

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Yeah, you’re dead on there.

csdeven on June 19, 2007 at 9:30 PM

Well, at least Mitt has ideas that Michael Moore can get behind.

jeffNWV on June 19, 2007 at 11:12 PM

When one has the urge to put the ad on ‘mute’ and the guy’s from the party one’s inclined to vote for is on, there’s a huge problem. That was the case with his ads so far, and that’s probably the case with this one.

I can’t nail why but I simply can’t get myself to like him. As a registered independent…, that might be a huge problem for him in the general. I can’t even see him winning the primary. Too perfect from his own standpoint and that doesn’t fly with the American public. Poll after poll reflects this, money aside.

Entelechy on June 19, 2007 at 11:18 PM

Lets put Mitts! comments in perspective.

Mitt: “I’m gonna work like crazy to go to Washington and make changes there!”

fred?: There a couple things I wanna git done.

Mitt! 3 fred? 0

csdeven on June 20, 2007 at 12:09 AM

He is the guy waiting in the weeds. Slowly, methodically, and effectively getting his message out.

csdeven on June 19, 2007 at 9:28 PM

Bwha ha ha ha ha… that’s some funny stuff right there. How much money has he spent on campaign ads in IA and NH already? He announced, what- in freakin’ January? Some idea of “waiting” you have there.

As far as his “message” goes, it seems to consist of saying whatever he thinks primary voters want to hear, even to the point of doing a 180 on positions he held just a couple years ago.

Thankfully, most of us see through the slickster “say anything to get elected” act, as evidenced by his 10% poll numbers despite the campaign ads, two debates, and being in the race for 6 months already.

Hollowpoint on June 20, 2007 at 1:45 AM

“He’s putting the third leg on that “three-legged stool,” writes Chris Cillizza.”

Sexist!

Kevin M on June 20, 2007 at 1:53 AM

JackStraw-

Please do prove your points for all our benefit. I’m sure many would be interested in evidence that Fred was as staunch a pro-choice advocate as was Mitt, and lied about when his apparent (and highly convienent) pro-life conversion took place.

You might also remind us how many Republican East Coast types have won the election in recent times

While you’re at it, explain how his strong support for gun control makes him simply “ambivalent” about guns, not to mention his blatant lie about being a lifelong hunter.

Also explain how he plans to cut taxes for everybody while also maintaining his big-government philosophy, as evidenced by his positions on health care and education.

Please, if not for my benefit, then for that of everyone else deciding who to vote for.

Hollowpoint on June 20, 2007 at 2:17 AM

Freelancer on June 19, 2007 at 5:11 PM

Yeah, Mitts! got some issues that he has to overcome, but my point was that he isn’t doing the “oh please love me ads” like Hillary is doing. He’s just slowly establishing his positions (flip-flopped as they may be), and name recognition.

He doesn’t have to worry about the national polls right now. Primaries are local races and in Iowa and N.H., Mitt! is polling so well that Rudy and McCain have bowed out of the straw poll. That isn’t the end of Rudy’s campaign, but it surely helps Mitt! with his. We are going to find that as we get closer to the primaries, people will become more serious about the core issues that conservatives care about.

We aren’t liberals, we don’t vote for who has the coolest campaign songs and and the best spoofs on popular TV shows.

Mitt! is establishing those core values, slowly and unassumingly. His ads are clear, concise, and solid on the issues conservatives care about. The video of his family was about as emotional as conservatives get, and even some conservatives were uncomfortable with the length and other issues. It is clear by that video Mitt! is an experienced family man, with family values, and he doesn’t have to fake it. That resonates with conservatives. Hell, it resonates with most people. And no one will be able to attack him on it and still keep their credibility.

csdeven on June 20, 2007 at 8:15 AM