Posted on 08/01/2016 4:39:33 PM PDT by grayboots
GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump released a new ad that exposed just how corrupt Democrat rival Hillary Clinton really is. In less than 60 seconds, the video highlighted some of Clinton’s biggest lies and most embarrassing remarks.
The ad began with Clinton speaking during an interview talking about the “Hillary standard” and the “standard for everyone else” — an obvious reference to FBI’s decision not to recommend charges be brought against the former secretary of state’s mishandling of classified information.
The video also showed a clip from Clinton’s testimony during the Benghazi investigation where she so famously asked what difference it made how the four Americans died in the terror attack at the American compound on Sept. 11, 2012.
Its ok. No shortage of material to make 5 of these.
Haven’e seen 1 trump ad in my swing state so far.It has been all Shillary for 6 weeks, non stop.
It needs to put these on TV, not facebook
Trump is doing this campaign low budget in comparison to Hillary. He’ll either win or lose the election on social media and the debates. Heaven help us.
I haven't watched FOX in about tyen years and I was surprised how pro hillary it was.
“He’ll either win or lose the election on social media and the debates.”
Also, he’ll either win or lose the election if the people will get up and fight for him and VOTE for him.
It all depends upon us, the people.
We need to help Trump. It can’t all be Trump.
You can’t see this ad anywhere on the internet. I see pages where its supposed to be but it never plays.
Thanks that works, but its amazing how many sites say they have it, but when you go there they don’t. CNN says they are running it, but its not the ad, its something else.
Caught a Hillary ad in Michigan last night.
bla bla bla
Trump saying to children “go f yourselves”.
bla bla bla
The point is not the attack or cause of the attack which has now been made the main focus of bengazi. The real issue is that for 6 hours hilary and obama did nothing to help these people defending their lives and ambassador stevens.
WRONG. He is keeping his powder dry until he sees the whites of her eyes.
There is no point in wasting a lot of money on TV advertising before Memorial Day. It is stupid to do that because people aren’t really paying that much attention to the election yet. After Memorial Day, he will take his adds to TV. Not before.
Memorial Day?
Sorry, new to posting. Video is in link.
Maybe Trump knows what he is doing and spending his money where it matters.
Do political TV ads even matter anymore?
by Paul Waldman
http://theweek.com/articles/596842/political-tv-ads-even-matter-anymore
When Jeb Bush’s campaign announced recently that it was pulling its TV ads from the Iowa airwaves, one might have expected it to be treated as the final acknowledgement of defeat for the onetime frontrunner. After all, TV advertising is the voice of the modern campaign, the place where all those plutocrat dollars are poured into the ears and eyes of a waiting electorate. Yet Bush’s move was greeted with something like approval, since he’ll be putting the money to better use in his ground operation.
There’s a contradiction at the heart of the 2016 presidential primary: While more money than ever is being spent on television advertising, television advertising seems less important than ever.
According to some projections, spending on TV ads in the 2016 election will be around $4.4 billion, up from $3.8 billion in 2012. The expanding role of super PACs, which can raise unlimited money, has a lot to do with it. And no super PAC this year has been as successful as Jeb Bush’s Right to Rise, which met its goal of raising $100 million, spent much of it on television ads, and is now left with a candidate currently running fifth in Iowa and sixth in New Hampshire, and winning the support of around one in every 20 Republicans in national polls.
TV ads certainly didn’t work for Jeb, but are they really less effective than they’ve been in the past? It’s a difficult question to answer when there are so many variables involved (there may be no amount of advertising that could turn Jeb Bush into a compelling candidate). But TV was always a blunt instrument; when you air a TV ad, you’re paying to reach lots of people who won’t vote at all, and others who won’t consider voting for you. You can do a bit of targeting — you’ll reach more people who are likely to be voters by advertising on news programs, for instance, and more young people by putting your spots on The Daily Show — but it isn’t particularly fine-grained.
And at a time when campaigns are getting more and better data about voters, there are many more effective ways of homing in on exactly the voters you want to reach. Campaigns are using that data to employ a spectrum of communication techniques, reaching voters through targeted web ads, emails, and social media. You may have been creeped out when you did a web search for shoes and then saw shoe ads popping up on every website you visit; campaigns can use the same kind of data to figure out which ads to put in your browser. Old-fashioned techniques like phone calls and knocking on doors are now deployed with highly specific information about every voter, not just which party they belong to but what issues they’re likely to care about and what kinds of appeals they might respond to.
The smarter political operatives are coming to understand the many limitations of TV advertising. One of the problems is that whatever persuasive effects the advertising has will decay quickly; within a few weeks at most, it will be as though you never aired your ads at all. And with news and information about the campaign coming from so many different directions, TV ads have a harder time cutting through the noise. Dollar for dollar, it seems a much better investment to put money into more personal forms of communication.
Yet campaigns, and especially super PACs, continue to spend millions of dollars on television. Why is that? There are a number of reasons. One is that if their opponents are doing it, they feel they have to match them, lest they let their voice be drowned out. They also know that TV remains the most-used medium for news and entertainment, so you can reach more people there than in any other medium. Another reason is that the people who run campaigns have been doing it this way for a long time, and that’s part of the strategy they know and understand. There are also financial considerations involved, since the networks of consultants who run campaigns tend to scratch each other’s backs. If I’m a consultant running one candidate’s race, I hire my buddy the media consultant and my other buddy the pollster, knowing that soon enough they’ll do the same for me.
TV ads also provide something concrete the super PACs can present to their billionaire benefactors, to say, “This is what your contributions paid for.” It’s much more compelling to show that billionaire a fancy TV spot starring the candidate and tell him that everyone in the state will see it a dozen times, than to show him a dusty office in a strip mall where volunteers are making phone calls, even if the latter might yield more bang for his buck.
Are things going to change? It’s hard to predict, but this election must surely make TV advertising a less appealing tool. Donald Trump is leading the Republican race despite having aired no TV ads at all (he recently announced that he’ll begin TV advertising, though it’s hard to see why). Even major donors are getting smarter; the Koch brothers, for instance, have decided that instead of just turning money over to political operatives to put on the air, they’d build an enormous political organization focused on grassroots voter contact. Other mega-rich donors may follow their lead.
But until then, if you live in a place like Iowa or New Hampshire right now or if you’re in a swing state next fall, you’ll still be inundated with political ads whenever you turn on your TV. Even if it’s mostly a waste.
Sorry low-budget doesn’t work. Close elections are never won the cheap. A national campaign for presidency must have access to at least half-billon to a billion dollars.
I’m not buying that. An ubiquitous message grows quickly annoying. Trump buying an hour of airtime on the majors to make his pitch, on the last Friday night in October, will be a far more impactful presentation. You don’t build an empire without extracting maximum value, I don’t think I need to sweat Trump spending the money when it matters.
We're in the summer doldrums, where, for a media starved for any semblance of news, even a single sentence is blown out of proportion, magnified innumerable times, and dissected by analysts who actually think they know something.
So it's slow right now.
Hillary's bombing the airwaves with ads of questionable import. Right now she comes across as scared, like a chicken with it's head cut off.
She's busy blowing the wad against an opponent who, at this moment, really refuses to show himself to her on the battle field. Patience never really being her strong suit, this pisses her off.
As an earlier poster opined, all he has to do is lay low till Labor Day. Between now and then, he'll keep himself in the news (he does that better than any one today), and, by dint of who is, he'll get more exposure, valuable exposure, that simple ads can't by.
He's live. He's real.
Since most people don't follow the politics of an election until Labor Day, laying back makes the most sense.
After Labor Day, the pent-up demand, both in the Trump camp and the electorate in general, will make itself manifest, as interest begins to peak.
Hillary's invisible opponent will be invisible no more, as sharp attacks from the Trump camp begin to find their mark, and, despite Clinton's best efforts to counter, become sharper and more persistent by the day.
All this in addition to Trump's continued mastery of the media.
Quite frankly, I don't believe the world will have ever seen anything quite like this.
We already have a good idea of what Trump is like under pressure. In the 2 months between Labor Day and the election, we're going to find out what Hillary's like in those circumstances.
No, believe me - Trump knows exactly what he's doing.
CA....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.