Posted on 11/26/2024 9:45:40 AM PST by CFW
To me, many of Harris' ads were cringe-worthy, and I don't see how they could have moved the needle towards her at all. If the goal was to go for the "undecided voters" of which I would think there were very few in the 2024 election, it was a big fail. Harris ads seemed to be geared to polish her credentials with the far-light wing of the party.
But, I'd like to know more about the firm, "Media Buying & Analytics". It seems a bit shady.
You mean the men for Kamala ad, the one with the fat guy dressed as a cowboys, saying he eats carburetors for breakfast, didn’t persuade men to support her??
Did they they get paid, in cash? Serious question, since reports are that the kamala campaign is in debt.
Will her Creditors ever get paid?
Pet peeve here…..
It’s “Democrat” not “Democratic”.
No money back guarantee clause?
MONEY LAUNDERING!
its a front for canal partners per article
But Trump's team was brilliant with the devastating "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" ad.
Wiki says...
"Trump spent more money on the ad than any other in the campaign, including ones on housing, immigration, and the economy, combined. The ads, which have several different variations, aired more than 30,000 times in every swing state. The Trump campaign put the ads in heavy rotation during televised NFL and college football games. According to an analysis by Future Forward, "Kamala is for they/them"...shifted the race 2.7 percentage points in favor of Trump after viewers watched it."I would not be surprised if the awful Harris/Walz ads actually shifted votes TO Trump.
Probably wasn’t a good idea to recruit actors from a Gay parade.
The ad agencies had an effeminate pudgy man declare “You think that I can’t fix a carburetor? I eat carburetors for breakfast!” That ad gained 5000 votes from Karens, lesbians, and angry trannies but turned off 1000000 normal people.
Man oh man, what a business to be in. Certainly, lots of that gross number went to buying advertising time. Probably, these media-buying companies consulted with the DNC as to where they should place ads. They may have consulted with regard to ad content, though I tend to doubt that.
I don’t own a TV, so I can’t comment on ad efficacy, but the ads I saw on YT seemed singularly ineffective at converting anyone. Like hiring Oprah, Lizzo, Beyonce, Springsteen.
Who are Oprah watchers going to vote for? Is there a question there? Was there a need to lock in Oprah as a Harris supporter, out of fear she’d switch to supporting Trump? Don’t make me laugh.
After you’ve called Trump a Nazi fascist 7,634 times, how good a producer/director do you need to make an ad to call him a Nazi fascist the 7,635th time?
Were kickbacks involved? They ARE democrats after all...
What is that, $3 million per day?! How is that even possible.
Money For Nothing.
Oooh they hate it when people say that.
The only ads I saw were ads with Kamala asking for money.
Per day? Easy. It's $999,900 per day for each of the three partners and $300 per day for the intern consultant to run the AI program.
And the consultant was overpaid at $300 per day, unless she also had to fetch coffee as an ancillary duty.
Oh, brother. Nothing shady about that. Suitcases full of cash left in train station lockers is transparent compared to that. They'd have to be pretty big lockers to account for the difference between the $880 million reported so far and the $1.6 b-b-b-billion I've seen estimated. Every laundry in Atlanta couldn't cover that.
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.