Lamont Campaign on the Attack

Ned Lamont's campaign is seeking donations to keep this new ad on the air in Connecticut.  See the ad for yourself first, but the basic premise consists of George W. Bush speaking Joe Lieberman quotes.  It is pretty effective and hits Lieberman where he is weakest - by pointing out that Joe is George W. Bush's favorite Democrat.  How do we know this approach hurts?  By checking the mail!

Lieberman's campaign just sent out a massive mailing to Democrats around the state.  This was a beautiful two page, color pamphlet - front and back - full of glossy photos.  It was a composition of bullet points of all the wonderful, progressive things Joe has done.  I have only been in CT for a little under two years, but it was the first piece of mail I've gotten from Joementum.  Wait.. that's not true, I did get a letter from him in response to my concerns regarding civil liberties protections and the so-called War on Terror.  The color pamphlet was an improvement.  At least he sounded like a Democrat in the pamphlet.  But what this mailing makes clear is that Joe is in trouble and needs to convince Democrats that he's still a Democrat.  His mailing, in a sense, feeds into this troubling narrative for Joe more than it dispels it.  Perhaps the non-blogging CT voter is looking at this and wondering, why is Joe suddenly touting progressivism?  Why is he trying so hard to convince me he is a good Democrat?  Maybe those stories on the evening news about Lieberman's stubborn support for George W. Bush are really are a problem.  

And then bang!

The Lamont campaign follows up with this powerful ad.  It uses the old morph Joe into W trick at the end (sorry if I spoiled the ending... I told you to click on the ad first).  It is a bold ad and cuts right to the main reason why Joe must go.  He not only won't stand up to George W. Bush, he actively supports George W. Bush.  And George W. Bush has been bad for the state of Connecticut, bad for the country and bad for the world.  And CT Dems know that for sure.  So.. if you can spare some change this month, help make sure as many CT Dems see this ad as possible.  Joe hasn't had a good news story to talk about since May, and even that wasn't really good news.  This ad will just continue his bad news streak.

•  Gave Him $50 This Morning

  Come on, people - get out those wallets and head over to http://www.nedlamont.com

  by bincbom on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:01:55 AM PDT

  •  um, isn't Lamont rich?

    Does he really need our money?

    by pacified on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:33:56 AM PDT

    •  Yes....?

      I'm sure you are just being provocative here, but a campaign costs millions these days.  Lamont is certainly doing some self-financing, but he is not taking large dollar donations from lobbyists like JoeMo.  As for being rich, Lamont has commented that it is a shame under the current system that one has to be independently wealthy to get a foot in the door these days.  I'm pretty sure he is for campaign finance reform that would address this problem, but I don't know his position verbatim, so I won't put words in his mouth.  That said, I guess we're lucky to have a progressive candidate with some bucks of his own that still seems like a decent, humble guy.

      Besides... I always view these things as an investment.  If we pay for the candidate, then he/she owes us and not...oh.. lets say the defense contractors, for example.

      by TheC on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:52:41 AM PDT

  •  Did the Same

    And there's more next paycheck!

    by bookwoman on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 12:07:13 PM PDT

    •  IN ANOTHER DIARY, ON A CONNETTICUT WEBSITE,

      I believe, I read a diary in which a Democrat was surprised to get a campaign call touting Lieberman -- while he was visiting his Republican parents.

      Hadn't gotten any at his own, because he's a registered Democrat.

      You got that right, Joementum's campaign was concentrating their call-ins to registered Republicans.

      His natural constituency.

      by judybrowni on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 01:04:23 PM PDT

•  This RRAWWWKSSSS!!! Tip jar, please.

  by Jimbob on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:02:17 AM PDT

•  love the crowd shot at the end!

  n/t

  by willy mugobeer on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:04:22 AM PDT

•  I particularly like that we stay on the offense

  I have been complaining (to myself at least) about how I am sick of Lieberman and his allies insulting me because I am supporting Lamont and read blogs.  I'm no terrorist.  I'm a 35 year old parent of two who lives in a Connecticut suburb for crying out loud.  How scary can I be?

  I wanted the Lamont campaign to respond somehow to Joe and tell him to stop insulting us.  But after seeing this ad, I realize that this is an even better approach.  Stay on the attack!  Keep hitting Joe where it hurts.  Keep Joe in whiney mode.  It looks very un-Senatorial when he does this.  Very un-Senatorial.  And yes.. that's a real word.  Maybe.

  by TheC on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:08:06 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    Stay on the attack!

    I agree, staying on offense is the best lamont campaign strategy; we can't let joe define the debate with all of joe's false mickey mouse charges -

    the lamont debate frame is that lieberman is bush's favorite democrat, period.

    by hartford for lamont on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 03:30:08 PM PDT

•  Your room is down the hall.

  For Joe, to get any further from W he would need to move into the Lincoln Bedroom.

  by OCMIHOP on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:09:08 AM PDT

•  Go, Ned, Go!

  Feel free to click on my subject line to donate!

  by fezzik on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:10:08 AM PDT

•  Video link

  

  Click on the image to play the video.

  by Scarce on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:12:34 AM PDT

  •  Excellent...thanks!

    I'll get some of these blogging tricks down one day.

    by TheC on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:17:49 AM PDT

•  The end of the Ad

  "I'm Ned Lamont and I approve of this message.

  SO DO WE!"

  That made me laugh so much.

  by AUEagle on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:15:02 AM PDT

  •  Har Har

    That's what grabbed me, too.

    by Attentus on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:30:45 AM PDT

•  Smartly moving forward

  I like this guy.  Thanks for this diary.

  by DrKate on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:24:31 AM PDT

•  Lieberman is staggering around

  He's trying to grasp momentum,but he's lost touch with the people on the ground. Ads like this are going to make a difference in the fall, too, as people will have a sense of Lamont as engaged and active. I just hope he doesn't turn out like Obama, who I think has been a bit of a disapointment.

  by cyclingdad on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 11:46:15 AM PDT

•  *Harold Ford, Jr. is on the attack, too*

  I get Chattanooga stations on my cable provider, and his latest ad is about the Iraqi govt proposal to give amnesty to those who have killed or wounded American troops. He pins it on W., and it's a great commercial.

  by cackyp on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 12:18:39 PM PDT

•  In all honesty ...

  
  
  Don't, get me wrong, I want Ned Lamont to win and back him 110%, but, in all honesty, I thought the Ad was a little amateurish...

  What would have been more effective here would be be to have Lieberman making direct quotes juxtaposed with Bush making direct quotes - with the similarities then apparent on fact.

  But to just throw up a "lipsyncing commerical" is too junvenile to be effective.  
  It can be legitimately stated that there is nothing real here about the Ad.

  The Lamont campaign seems to have a real problem here making serious, professional-quality, hard-hitting commericals ( the Dog Ad., the Markos Ad., etc.).  I don't know who in their campaign is responsible here for coming up with these lame Ads. but they should be fired and replaced with real professionals who know what the heck they're doing.

  A Successful Ad. needs to do the following:

  1. Look genuine, authentic, "real", and credible.

  2. Make a clear, unmistakable point or points.

  3. Make the candidate look like he belongs (in the Senate).

  4. Make both an intellectual point and make an emotional appeal to voters.

  5. Make it clear why the candidate is a better choice than the opponent.

  Obvious gimmicktry in an Ad. is just counter-productive.

  An Effective Ad. could be as simple as footage showing Joe Lieberman making the absurd statement that:  "there must not be any criticism of Bush because we're at War", followed by a graphic showing the number of War casualties  (20,000); the caskets coming home; showing the disgrace of Abu-Grahib & Guantanimo; showing headline clippings citing Halliburton ripping off Taxpayers, hatred of America on the rise, and Osama Bin Laden free.  This then concluded with Ned Lamont making the simple statement: "George Bush has made terrorism worse not better and Joe Lieberman has helped him do it every step of the way. It's time for a Change in policy."

  That, my friends, would work and be a very effective Ad.
  
  
  
  

  by GiveMeLibertyOrDeath on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 01:18:19 PM PDT

  •  wrong wrong wrong!

    What would have been more effective here would be be to have Lieberman making direct quotes juxtaposed with Bush making direct quotes - with the similarities then apparent on fact.

    you are wrong wrong wrong here my friend, and basically, you do not understand the theory of communications media;

    the now deceased media guru marshall mcluhan defined the TV medium as a "cool" medium where imagery trumps content -

    this latest lamont ad is a perfect adherence to mcluhanesque TV media theory;

    what you are advocating is for lots of content, which is anti-thetical to the cool medium of TV.

    what you are advocating, lots of content, is suitable for newspapers which mcluhan labeled a "hot" medium.

    every communications & media/advertising program in every college in the world now teaches mcluhan's 1964 book, "Understanding Media" as gospel.

    by hartford for lamont on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 03:53:18 PM PDT

    •  Try again

      
      
      I think you are taking this mcluhan thing a little too literally here.

      I will grant you that image does trump content. That idea by itself is fine.
      But what is the more effective imagery here?  

      a) a cheap lipsynching stunt or b) photographs of coffins

      c) Lieberman kissing George Bush or d) lipsynching?

      e) Lieberman saying "no one can criticize Bush" or f) lipsynching?

      g) Lieberman paraphrasing/requoting Bush's words  or h) lipsynching

      Answers:  b, c, e, g

      My point is that this lipsynching video is an inauthentic, juvenile (read: cheap) technique that does not even serve as a good illustration of effective use of imagery.

      There needs to be some level of maturity and also some level of authenticity as well no matter what mcluhan says (or your interpretation of him).

      I'm sorry, but a barking Dog is not going to win you a lot of Votes.  That ineffectual of an Advertisment is not worth wasting the damn $1,000,000 to get it on the air to begin with.

      Ads. cost big money to a Campaign and you need to make them really count and be powerful.

      I agree that images are important and vital, but those images should also be smart and be able to stand up to scrutiny.   Recall, lipsynching ended the career of Milli Vanilli.  I hope it won't also end the career of Ned Lamont.

      There are better images to use than this...
      
      

      by GiveMeLibertyOrDeath on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 05:30:59 PM PDT

      •  slaps down joe hard

        I'm sorry, but a barking Dog is not going to win you a lot of Votes.

        that ad was ok at best, but the new lamont ad is great because it glues lieberman to bush (ie, lieberman IS bush!) in an easily comprehended way, again, in the mcluhanesque "cool" TV media way, via easily comprehended imagery.

        and the new lamont TV ad is great because it really plays to the lamont primary voter base, who hungered to see lamont slap down joe hard after joe went negative on lamont, which the new ad does -

        you are too hung-up on the technics here.

        by hartford for lamont on Tue Jun 27, 2006 at 11:25:43 PM PDT

•  ad goes even farther

  It is a bold ad and cuts right to the main reason why Joe must go.  He not only won't stand up to George W. Bush, he actively supports George W. Bush.

  actually (now pay close attention dear readers) this ad goes even farther than that; this ad is implicitly saying that joe lieberman IS the very incarnation of george bush!

  the morphing stuff is now old hat, but the lip-sync stuff is truly history-making;

  just a fine fine ad all around!

  by hartford for lamont on Mon Jun 26, 2006 at 03:21:08 PM PDT