Posted on 03/09/2017 4:40:53 PM PST by davikkm
Donald Trump’s 2016 TV campaign advertisements were far more focused on promised policies than were the ads run by Hillary Clinton’s team, which were far more numerous, negative and narrowly focused on personality claims, says a new report. “Over 60 percent of ads supporting Clinton were solely about candidate characteristics, while only about 25 percent were focused on policy,” said the report, titled “Political Advertising in 2016: The Presidential Election as Outlier?”
“This is a huge difference from Trump’s advertising, over 70 percent of which was focused on policy,” said the report, released March 6. “These strategic differences may have meant that Clinton was more prone to voter backlash and did nothing to overcome the media’s lack of focus on Clinton’s policy knowledge, especially for residents of Michigan and Wisconsin, in particular, who were receiving policy-based (and specifically economically-focused) messaging from Trump.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Hillary came across as a cold, heartless b*tch.
“Hillary came across as a cold, heartless b*tch.”
How could she possibly come across any OTHER way?
the cult of personality didn’t work out so well for the rats
Naw, get out of here!
Hillary didn’t have any new ideas or positive personal traits to offer, so attacking Trump was her only option.
In the final days, there was one of 2 spots she continually ran in Michigan. It showed some young kids apparently watching TV, with various Trump’s voice saying some of his controversial comments over the previous months. There is one where it bleeps out Trump saying the F-word.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA
It then brings up the tag line “Our children are watching.” Then asks the question “What example will we set for them?” Unfortunately, it then cuts to an arrogant Hillary boasting in a speech about how great an example she is.
I thought at the time it would backfire, because Hillary’s campaign exposed our children to that heavily-edited stuff from Trump that the kids would otherwise not have ever seen. If she truly cared about the kids, she wouldn’t have been running that repulsive ad so many times during the dinner hour, etc. where they were sure to see it many times.
This is consistent with past elections at all levels.
When Republicans run ad hominem eg Monica Lewinsky, they lose. When Republicans run on issues, eg Contract with America, they win.
Surprise, there is a double standard. If both R and D run smear campaigns, the Dems usually win.
This is seen over and over in Senate, Congress and Governor races.
The main purpose of negative campaigns is to suppress the vote of the other side.
It is not to win votes for your candidate.
If Trump ads had gone heavy ad hominem he would have suppressed the enthusiasm.
If Newt had gone ad hominem rather than Contract with America in ‘94
then all those MoralMajority/ChristianCoalition voters would have never voted.
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.