Move On's ad is wrong because of it's glibness. What if the General's last name was Smith?

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

They chose a cheap shot over substance because they were overly committed to the cleverness of their word play. So their message got lost. Clever wordsmiths. Bad messengers.

We need Paul Revere, not Oscar Wilde.

[MadMaddie]

1. Hmmm I don't know....the Rethuglicans have been using

the same tactics and kicking our ass..

How do we get competitive and compete with them if our messages are nice? Just askin...

[ProSense]

4. The Republicans having been kicking our ass on message,

that's why 60% of Americans want withdrawal instead of supporting the surge.

The GOP lost the election in 2006, 2005, stole the presidency in 2004 and 2000, and lost a lot of state and local offices in 2004. So they are in power in the executive branch and abusing power daily.

Democrats could have buried the Repub's message by now if they stood firm on principle. Where would the Repubs be now if Dems had stuck together on the funding vote? Petraeus' report would have been a none issue.

[MadMaddie]

22. That's all I am saying...stay on message stick together

and don't splinter when it counts....the Democratic Congress has not even performed the basics of team work..

[TomInTib]

2. Good point, P L.

It was sophomoric and, from a marketing standpoint, amateurish.

I certainly hope that work such as that is not the best they can do.

[hlthe2b]

3. I tend to think that that catchy little glib piece in the header...

will make more people actually READ it...

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

5. I think it makes the people who had a propensity to read it in the first place, read it

The so-called "preaching to the choir".

But for people who are not members of the choir, it's juvenile, off-putting, name -calling, call it what you will. It places the whole tenor of the piece in question, when one could have let the facts stand more on their own.

If it had been me, I would have structured it along the lines of :

He sold you WMD and the War in Iraq -

Will you now buy the surge?

[hlthe2b]

10. Perhaps... but it sure got a lot of people talking about it ... AND

when people hear about something, they become curious... I'm betting quite a few people (who ordinarily might not) WILL read it.. Now, will it change minds? Not on the 24% or so hopeless minority... But among those who have been concerned about the Iraq war dragging on but remain uninformed--yes. I think it just might.


Now, a more subtle approach might have been acceptable as well, but I'm not ready to sling anger at Moveon...

[rockymountaindem]

6. It also, probably, makes a lot of people think about the Civil War

due to the use of the play on the word betrayal. We all know how passionate people can be on that issue.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

7. yeah . . . right . . .

:eyes:

[rockymountaindem]

15. That's what I thought

And I'm not one to usually think of the Civil War. I would think the idea of a general + treason would do that.

[w4rma]

8. Heh, it got your attention. And I bet you won't forget it. (nt)

[Generator]

9. Sore Loserman flip flopper is what you are!

Yep, only Republicans can be glib. Democrats must have GRACE even while they murder us and destroy the country.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

12. Your argument is the old "we have to match them in the limbo contest"

They go low, we can go lower.

Your point of view does not allow for the growing sophistication of Americans in understanding how they are "played". I think people are getting it.

Why does Move On have to play for the lowest common denominator? They don't have those guys in the first place. They are just loosing fence straddlers who are truly conflicted about the war.

Like I said earlier, they could run an ad that referenced actual history - Petraeus and the mobile WMD's- that would have had far more value than calling him a playground name.

[cali]

13. LOL!

Nothing gets by you, eh?

To paraphrase Clinton:

It's the framing, stupid.

[FuzzySlippers]

11. Then they could call him General Myth.

:shrug:

[madfloridian]

16. LOL

Ok, that's funny.

[illinoisprogressive]

14. I don't care. I thought is was good. forget the establishment beltwayers

[madfloridian]

17. I loved the ad.

I thought it definitely made an impression.

[2rth2pwr]

18. The ad would have been better if

they would have included a picture of a nice pink tiara.

[Blue_In_AK]

19. I agree with that...

General Petraeus can't help it that his name rhymes with Betray Us. Using his name in this way just seems a bit childish for a serious ad.

[ShortnFiery]

20. OMG! I nominate this as the most lame thread of the week.

This is truly bunk.

Newsflash: You do what works!

General Peaches Betrayus works just fine! :evilgrin:

[2rth2pwr]

21. "what works!" being the

operative phrase.

[ShortnFiery]

23. Exactly - how many threads have been started to discuss MoveOn.org?

I rest my case. ;)

[Blue_In_AK]

24. I see your point...

But this was the first -- and only -- one I responded to, so I think I'm allowed.

[ProSense]

25. And MoveOn not Petreaus' report is the issue right?

Can you say distraction?