It looks like they saved money by using the same photo.
I’ve never thought of tats as manly. Quite the opposite, to me they’re a sign of a lack of confidence kind of like a permanent mask to hide behind.
But then my generation knows about the connection between tats and the concentration camps.
Few tattoos make people look good.
And they’re banned in the Bible because marring the body was a pagan practice.
I would never stoop to disfigure myself with tattoos.
My thoughts as well. It's almost like wearing a fake teardrop tat. When I see all these young people with tats covering their entire body it makes me think that they: 1) are attention whores, 2) that they are impulsive and don't consider the future consequences of their action (what that tramp stamp is going to look like at 50), and 3) how can they afford that and pay their bills? My guess is that they have a hard time prioritizing what's important and what's not. I'd guess a lot have bill collectors calling them a lot.
>It looks like they saved money by using the same photo.<
It’s the same individual, but definitely a different pose. The Clinton ad has him with his hair-covered chin lowered, but eyes staring the camera with a somewhat menacing stare.
The Portland pose has him simply gazing into the camera, bearded chin level.