techPresident - Obama - Comments

Thank you very much for this

Dersimli — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:12:11 -0400

Thank you very much for this useful article. I like it.

Regards

Well-documented that Obama smears started in conservative media

Luigi Montanez — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:56:54 -0400

Yes, Clinton supporters and conservative Democrats may have repeated/believed the smears, but it was only well after they already had traction from Fox News (Muslim/Madrassa rumor), Rush Limbaugh (Michelle/Whitey rumor), and other conservative outlets.

Why are you assuming that it

Marco Carbone — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:17:59 -0400

Why are you assuming that it is mostly conservatives spreading these around in the first place? When I was canvassing for Obama in northern Nevada, I encountered these rumors several times from hardcore Democrats (who all happened to be Clinton supporters). I would contend that these rumors are being spread around mostly by low-information voters, regardless of their political proclivities.

The feedback won't be that different, but the outcome may be.

Sarah Granger — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:03:12 -0400

She'll receive a lot of messages from people telling her to stay in, and she'll receive a lot of messages asking her to step down, and she'll receive a lot of inflammatory notes that go straight into the trash. I doubt much of it will be too different than what she's been receiving the past month or so. (As Gary Hart's online director, I was privy to his inbox when he was deciding whether to run in '04... the email gets predictable pretty quickly.)

She'll raise some money, and it looks like there are some campaigns pushing her as VP choice for Obama. She might receive suggestions as to whether she should stay in the Senate, go for a different post in the administration, take a hiatus, etc.

The real question is how much the campaign is actually listening vs. just doing this to buy time. They started out with an online announcement suggesting the campaign would be a "conversation", so how does that conversation end? James Carville noted on CNN last night that it takes time to figure these things out.

David Mamet-like subtitles.

Read Scott Martin — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:05 -0400

Second prize is a set of steak knives.

Read Scott Martin

Godwin's Law

rattle — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:36:34 -0400

"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Apparently Usenet and Democratic politics have a few things in common.

- nick

I agree with you

Xavier Lopez-Ayala — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:27:37 -0500

We'll probably see something like this from whoever the nominee is for the general. What I thought was most interesting is the number of "assumptions" Zephyr made. I'm not sure where he's from, but he might have tried talking to someone who went to one of the 22 events across the country if he couldn't make one himself.

are PDF folks talking past each other?

Jon Garfunkel — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:02:11 -0500

I'm over 30 as well, and I don't have an Obama ringtone. But I can understand the appeal (as Andrew told Michele Norris last week). It's a hook to get volunteers into the campaign, who can do the phone calls, hold the signs, canvass, etc.

Gosh, you sound like a conservative talking about the Democrats!

Freedomfighter — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 10:48:49 -0500

Morra,
Social networks enforce identity politics and young people capture Obama because he looks like he is a high school debate student. Young people feel depressed about politics and Obama feeds hope. When you see your friend support Obama on their myspace or facebook, it is easy to join.

The dangerous thing about social networks is they foster closed mind s, paranoia and conspiracy theories.

Really? "Nothing" to learn?

Read Scott Martin — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:59:40 -0500

I think the Obama campaign might have reason to quibble with that. Put yourself in their shoes. How do you go about finding out that your buy was errant - mistargeted or mislaunched, it makes no difference - when you only have five days from launch to the next important election date.

Do you think the network or the agency alerted the campaign to the mistakes, or was it left to the campaign to discover the error on its own?

Accountability is not a topic to shy away from, if we want to continue developing confidence in the interactive medium.

Didn't Mean to Imply It Wasn't Factual, But

EricFrenchman — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:49:00 -0500

I don't believe pointing out something that was obviously a minor mistake is news. It appears to me to be petty and looking to embarrass the campaign. I felt the same thing about the Romney campaign running on unwanted sites, but unfortunately because of his stand on that issue it was newsworthy for some.

Everyone has made minor mistakes in online advertising and the more media you buy the more mistakes you are going to make. We need to get past gotcha moments especially ones as trivial as this. This just fuels the flames that you can't trust online advertising.

What good can possibly come from this? There is NO learning to be gained from pointing out this minor event. Nothing.

Consider it a cautionary tale

Colin Delany — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:36:15 -0500

Hi Eric, I agree with you that things like this are ultimately trivial and shouldn't be a "gotcha" against a campaign or against the general concept of online advertising. But that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be reported at all. At the very least, other campaigns should know that things like this can happen and be prepared when they do. In this case, Alan's piece was entirely factual and should cause no embarrassment to the campaign.

Colin Delany
e.politics
http://www.epolitics.com

We Need to Move Past Things Like This

EricFrenchman — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:40:05 -0500

Alan,

Why is this news? So the Obama campaign had an incorrectly geo-targeted ad run and it was corrected. Either they placed it wrong by mistake or the network made a mistake. Either way it was fixed.

We as an industry need to move past obvious mistakes that were corrected as quickly as possible. Post like this do nothing to help campaigns want to run online advertising. Pointing out that online ads can be fixed quicker than offline is not a significant selling point.

Eric Frenchman
Chief Internet Strategist
Connell Donatelli Inc.

Terrorism is NOT the main issues in foreign policy....

Freedomfighter — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:01:44 -0400

9/11 was the blowback from our sanctions on Iraq. Our troops were station in Saudi Arabia to defend it from Saddam. Trade is what is being defended.

Afghanistan is largely a waste of time. The Taliban never attacked the US, never invaded a foreign country, never fired missiles in to another country, never had anything approaching WMD.

See the timeline at the link below:

http://www.thekingdommovie.com/timeline/index.html

Not just the MSM

cfinnie — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:51:15 -0400

I agree that it's time to take democracy out of the hands of the professionals and give it back to the people.

But more people were suspicious of ParkRidge47 than just the media. I was and said so. Some people disagreed with me, but others agreed.

As an advertising professional of many years experience, I have always respected the right of the candidates I work for to set their own message. I never hesitate to speak out about my own feelings on a candidate or issue. But I NEVER represent my views as those of the candidate. ParkRidge47 created a piece that looked like it came from a campaign--something he was not authorized to do. For me, that's where the line has to be drawn.