Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Election ’08 Ad Watch: Bushwacked

A new website and new Liberal ads attacking Harper on the economy and foreign policy. Do they work? You be the judge!

(and watch for a surprise cameo from an old face in the third one)

How Would You Rate This Ad?
See Results

How Would You Rate This Ad?
See Results

How Would You Rate This Ad?
See Results

I would also post the latest Tory ad that links fear of the Green Shift to the economy but it has yet to be posted on the Tory site or youtube. I assume this is because everyone in the Conservative war room has been fired by this point in the campaign...

Labels: , ,


  • That third one scared the crap out of me. Not sure if that's going to go over well with people. I think it was the tone of voice of the guy speaking. The rest of it was okay though.

    By Blogger Carrie, at 9:22 p.m.  

  • I actually liked the third ad, although the guy seemed to be a bit too frantic at the end. Still, nice to see Chretien and "soliders in our streets".

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:25 p.m.  

  • These ads will likely resonate with people to some degree. Not sure about the third one - it will likely polarize more than anything, especially the "Proud of the Liberals" part.

    On the third one, was I the only one to see the "The Canadian government has not stood being it's" when it should be "its" without the apostrophe

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:26 p.m.  

  • These ads will appeal to people who already dislike Harper.

    Hence, they won't appeal to me.

    By Blogger Eric, at 9:41 p.m.  

  • The ads are fine: the third ad is by far the most effective. However, the voice-over on all the ads sounds cheap, whiny and drama-queenish. Needs more baritone!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:57 p.m.  

  • Harper should have waited until next year for the election - at least then we wouldn't have to endure these god awful Harper/Bush comparisons.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:05 p.m.  

  • Can't we just be Canadian for once. Why do we always need to mention George Bush in our internal politics. The Liberals did this last election and it backfired, why try it again?

    Here's to hoping the new parliament does not mention US issues more then our own, and that the name George W. Bush, and all other US politicians are only mentioned if they are visiting.

    By Blogger Brad, at 10:07 p.m.  

  • Have you Liberals not learned from your Martin debacle. Yet more soldiers I see. You want to see ads that talk to the people - look at Jack's new spots. The kitchen table talk resonates better than this crap the Liberals are putting out.

    Vote Layton - the real ethical choice!

    The Cons are firing their staff and holding them accountable - the Liberals should be firing their entire war room for being completely off the mark once again.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:38 p.m.  

  • So are they gonna make a good ad touting the Liberal economic record? One with Paul Martin as finance Minister? Hello, 8 straight surpluses and even tax cuts? For all their bleating about being fiscally conservative and the only ones trustworthy in bad economic times, the Cons have outspent even a Liberal government held hostage by the NDP.

    It would be smart to show Deficit Jim Flaherty's record giving Ontario a $6 Billion deficit during the Harris-Eaves years, doing just what he's doing now...

    Come guys, this is a no brainer, the Liberals should own the economy. Hell use Andrew Coyne's stuff in the ad, for gawd sake...

    By Blogger Mike, at 10:43 p.m.  

  • Great third ad Liberal Party. I particularly liked the voice over on the BushHarper website. By all means...get the media to highlight these this very second. I may even start a campaign myself. How much easier can the march to a Tory Majority get?

    P.S. My apologies regarding the anonymous post...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:42 p.m.  

  • In the first ad, are the Liberals actually calling the Bush administration "forward looking"? Weird.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:06 a.m.  

  • I'm with Carrie on this one, I'm not convinced the tone of voice in these ads is really the best way forward. I'm also skeptical at how much people are still willing to tolerate the Harper/Bush line. Hopefully it works, we need something to get us back on track.

    By Blogger Maestro, at 12:07 a.m.  

  • This "green-collar job" concept really needs to go. I have no idea what it means, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone on that.

    These ads are dull as boardroom Powerpoint slide shows and the narrator really doesn't deliver the lines well. The Liberals are getting no help from this commercial series.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 12:25 a.m.  

  • "This "green-collar job" concept really needs to go. I have no idea what it means, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone on that."

    YES! That has bugged me in both the US and Canada. It sounds like a real reach - unemployment is at historically low levels, so you make up some sector of the economy and say it is doing badly.

    You may note that Ernie Eves FIRED Jim Flaherty and gave him a crap job as minister of innovation and entrepreneurship or some such. At the time when Flaherty was canned from finance Ontario had a large surplus, instead of the deficit Rae left.

    Some context:

    And for good measure, Ontario's economy outgrew every other G-7 economy:
    And unemployment fell dramatically:

    The Harris scaremongering would also be a bit more credible if, you know, Harper had cut government spending or taxes nearly as dramatically as Harris. Frankly I find the shrill objections to Stephen Harper from the left amazing - it seems more an expression of membership in the cultured class, than a rational reaction to anything he has done or is likely to do (plus the fact that unlike Clark*, who you guys love, he is winning).

    *I recall a similar tendency for people on the left to love McCain in 2000 and people on the right to love Hillary Clinton once it was clear neither could actually win.

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 12:46 a.m.  

  • It's too bad M. Dion's many citizenships do not include American, since it seems he is under the impression that he is running for the Presidency of our neighbour to the South.

    How many times and how dead can the LPC--fleeing their platform, polls and leader--kill poor, benighted W.?

    Two weeks to go--how toxic will it get/

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:06 a.m.  

  • Does anyone else find it interesting to see Rae do the hatchet job on this one today? After Iggy whacked them on the economy yesterday?

    I know it's debate prep time and I know Kenney does this sort of thing for the Tories, but it certainly seems like they're trying to keep Dion out of the limelight.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:15 a.m.  

  • I'm not sure any amount of BushHarper or soldiers in our streets will scare people enough, this time.
    It's pretty hard to ignore the Ontario Minister of Finance coming out against a tax shift.

    Sad that Libs resort to using our soldiers in attack ads, I would guess the families of the soldiers don't much appreciate that.

    When are the Harper is anti-gay anti-abortion ads coming out?

    By Blogger wilson, at 2:13 a.m.  

  • Good to see that the trolls have a topic to flee to, so they can copy-and-paste their talking points in peace.

    (That's, um, a bit awkward in plagiarism threads.)

    wilson, for example, hauls out the ol' "SOLDIERS IN OUR STREETS, LIBERALS ARE ANTI-MILITARY!" line from 2006. One problem: the ad clearly implies that the issue is not soldiers per se, but that they would be bogged down in Iraq.

    wilson seems to be under the opinion that Canadians would think that's a good thing. Considering what that war did to America, well, that's a bit of a stretch.

    And then there's curiously named 'agrit', who seems unaware that a foreign affairs critic should be responsible for, um, criticizing foreign affairs. I can see why 'agrit' would be confused, considering the war room that supplied his talking points is not familiar with the concepts of "competent foreign minister" or "ministers speaking independently".

    (But I assure you: it's possible. Just not with Steve's bunch.)

    As for the ads, I think the third was quite effective, but that weird little extended ending hurt it slightly, as did the tone of the otherwise-skilled announcer. I also think "do you really want more of this" is too pat; the old "wrong on x, wrong on y" is a classic for a reason.

    But, heck, I'll allow it. I can see why they'd want to try something original. Certainly the government isn't.

    By Blogger Demosthenes, at 2:55 a.m.  

  • Man, they really have to get that introduction of the bushharper.ca site right away before people hear it.

    They're being childish which I think they should leave to the Tories.

    No need to go to their level.

    By Blogger me dere robert, at 9:00 a.m.  

  • Wow, the Liberal brand must really be polling badly if two out of three ads don't include the party's name or logo, outside of the fine print.

    By Blogger mvc, at 9:20 a.m.  

  • The first ad could be an NDP ad for all we know. The thrid ad is a bit hysterical, showing that the Libeals must be in full panic mode.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 11:56 a.m.  

  • I am utterly depressed by the Harper = Bush story.

    Why not go the whole hog and just say Harper = Hitler ?

    I think I will stay at home on the 14th.

    PS For the third one, isn'y it 'lucky' Michael Ignatieff didn't win the leadership.

    By Blogger colins, at 1:09 p.m.  

  • By Blogger raybanoutlet001, at 1:35 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home