byChris Bowers, Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 02:02:43 PM EST
Back in 2006, one of MyDD's main projects during the summer and fall was the Adwatch. the purpose of the adwatch was to critique Democratic campaign commercials based on the criteria of the MyDD / Courage Campaign / Wright Consulting 2006 candidate memo. In the memo, we told candidates to focus hard on Iraq, to blame Republicans for it, to promise accountability and oversight on Iraq, and to clearly identify yourself as a Democrat. I still think that was good advice based on solid research, and I think we made a difference on 2006 Democratic messaging with that campaign.
Now, just a few short months later, Bill Richardson has started the 2008 campaign ad season by going on the air in Iowa and New Hampshire. As such, I would like to start up the adwatch again, although I should note that there is not candidate memo or other general theory currently serving as the touchstone for my critiques. Here are his two ads: a bio piece called "life's work" and an Iraq piece called "the wall."
Starting with "The Wall," I like the concreteness of the visuals, which strike me as very effective, and the message of total withdrawal. At the same time, I don't think the ad points out that Richardson's total withdrawal plan is different from that of other candidates. Then again, maybe that can wait--this is an ad where he is trying to introduce himself, not draw an immediate contrast with other candidates. What I don't like about the ad is that it does not blame Republicans for Iraq, even though it is quite clearly Republicans who managed the war into the ground and who now refuse to start brining it to an end. Saying you will "work with both parties" on Iraq I don't think accurately characterizes the current political difficulties in ending the war in Iraq. "Life's Work" is a more standard biographical spot, and as such is not the sort of ad we usually focused on in the adwatch. It is very well produced, and focuss on his obviously impressive resume, although it oddly never has Bill Richardson himself speaking in it. Do voice over commercials still work?
Overall, there are two problems with both of these ads: over-emphasis on bi-partisanship, and a complete lack of self-identification as a Democrat. Neither commercial offers any information as to Richardson's partisan affiliation, which is particularly strange since he is running for the Democratic nomination and since the Democratic brand is so strong right now. As for the consistent message of bi-partisanship, while I know that is what some pollsters (PDF) are saying Democrats want, I think that is faulty information. As I wrote last week:
Many establishment types will continue to argue that the country has a deep desire for bipartisanship even while Democrats hold the advantage, and even point to polls numbers indicating as much [PDF]. However, what are people going to say when they are asked whether or not they wish we could all just get along? No? It is like the crappy 2006 exit poll that asked people whether or not they thought combating corruption in government was important, and therefore supposedly proved that combating corruption was the number one issue in the campaign when everyone polled stunningly said that corruption in government was bad. Maybe next we should ask voters whether or not they like sunshine and puppies as a means of proving that sunshine and puppies are the most important issues in the campaign.
The country doesn't want compromise, or bipartisanship, or someone who straddles both parties. Right now, the country wants Democrats. All of our candidates running for higher office need to remember that, and we need to keep reminding them.
Both Iowa and New Hampshire resoundingly rejected Republicans in 2006, even supposedly "moderate" and "bipartisan" Republicans. Combined, despite their small size, those two states produced four of the thirty US house seats we pickup last year. Further, Democrats also took back every legislative chamber and governorship in both states that they did not already possess. These two states were among two of the biggest nodes in the 2006 landslides, so it doesn't seem to me that the good folks in Iowa and New Hamsphire want bi-partisanship--it seems like they want Democrats. I think Bill Richardson is listening to the wrong people if he thinks otherwise. I certainly hope he comes to more clearly and strongly identify as a Democrat in the future.
Update: This isn't directly related to the ads, but I wanted to note that the four new US house Democrats from Iowa and New Hampshire--Braley, Loebsack, Shea-Porter, and Hodes--not only took Republican seats, but are quite a progressive group. Residents of Iowa and New Hampshire didn't just reject Republicans, they embraced progressives. That could add an interesting factor to the early states.
