Here’s the TV ad released by the Sheheen campaign today.
Thoughts? My own first reaction is that it looks like Nikki Haley is the incumbent superintendent of education rather than governor. There’s no explanation for why the governor should be held accountable for the performance of schools.
It also seems kind of weird and backwards. Don’t people of Nikki Haley’s wing of the GOP usually bemoan the state of public schools, while SC Democrats stick up for public educators doing the best they can with what they’ve got? I mean, wouldn’t Nikki’s natural reaction be, “Yes, and this is why we need tuition tax credits?” Or another of those old SCRG talking points.
I’m not sure what sort of train of thought this is meant to invoke, beyond “Nikki Haley — bad.” But maybe you see something else…
Related Posts
Of course, I’m a tough audience. I’m trying to remember the last campaign ad for TV I liked, from any candidate running for any office. I’m coming up blank.
These things try to engage voters on a level that I tend to find offensive. The whole genre is problematic.
You’re more than a tough audience since you now work at ADCO. Perhaps you should seek out some business from Sen. Sheheen’s gubernatorial campaign so he can successfully spread the right message to get elected. Sincerely.
I’m a Sheheen supporter, and I think it’s a sucky ad. Why do the political consultants insist on insulting voters’ intelligence with reductionist oversimplification just because many of us are poorly-informed and easily fooled? Our political environment has been reduced to attack ads, misleads, and distortions – funded by powerful hidden interests. Thanks, Dent, Atwater, Rove, et.al. Now the Supreme Court wants to let your backers spend prolifically while remaining unknown – and taking a tax deduction by faking as an “educational charitable” endeavor.
The ad is sucky because rather than benchmarking to global performance in cognitive skills and educational attainment (16 countries currenently outperform the U.S.)
http://thelearningcurve.pearson.com/index/index-ranking
Sheheen’s focuses on spending comparisons without tying spending to student skills attainment.
In other words, make taxpayers spend more for teacher pay because unionized states do.
As an independent voter I decry our state’s educational inertia relative to Finland’s, not New York’s.
I think it fails on multiple points. It focuses on results for which she has little responsibility – yet. It fails to address her past policy statements and the weaknesses of her sudden turnaround on the need for funding. It is an attack ad, which lowers the level of the conversation and spurs off-topic distortions. It uses that obnoxious, ominous-sounding music. It will likely alienate some knowledgeable supporters and push them away from contributing to his campaign.
TV ads are a waste of time and money, most of the time. The Freakonomics guys have shown this pretty convincingly with, like, math and stuff
I support Sheheen as the better choice, but in my alternative universe, James Smith would run, and win!