Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: LWACE on March 16, 2004, 05:59:00 PM
-
LMAO, you guys been seein the commercials on tv, its heatin up!
I like the Bush one, Kerry, Wrong on taxes, Wrong on defense!
They both got some good ones, anyone else got any favorites?
-
yea the power button on my TV
-
That doesnt count as a Bush/Kerry favorite commercial, while the button on ur tv might be one of your favorite things, it doesnt qualify.
-
Only 8 more months of this. :eek:
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why don't you guys just do yourselves a favor ... outlaw political commercials.
Youre joking right?
-
Whats funny with the Bush commercials is the statement thats said at the end - "President Bush approves this message" .. Of course he would approve it, its designed for him. I just think its a little out of the ordinary :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by WldThing
Whats funny with the Bush commercials is the statement thats said at the end - "President Bush approves this message" .. Of course he would approve it, its designed for him. I just think its a little out of the ordinary :rolleyes:
The point of that is claim direct ownershop of the message, he takes accountability for it. This is oppsed to the usual but vague "This message brought to you americans for yadayadayada" where politicans let their related intrest grpups do the real mud slinging.
-
Why would we outlaw them? American politics are tame compared to some EU countries.
Bush says Kerry is wrong for America, Kerry Says Bush lied, Bush then says Kerry not only lies but also lies about who he is. The people decide whom they believe or in some case mistrust less and vote.
Nothing is said by the campaigns that isn’t said by the population in general.
If you don’t like American Politics or the political discussions on this forum why do continually end up making replies in such threads. Is that hard to simply avoid such topics?
I can’t remember the last time I posted a reply in a thread about Norwegian or EU politics.
-
Bush has certainly not turned out to be the leader I had hoped he would mature into, but the thought of a President Kerry is simply repulsive, revolting, discombobulating.
These commercials are a waste of money for me. Its Bush or bust as far as Im concerned :D
-
Originally posted by WldThing
Whats funny with the Bush commercials is the statement thats said at the end - "President Bush approves this message" .. Of course he would approve it, its designed for him. I just think its a little out of the ordinary :rolleyes:
Political campaign commercials are required to identify the organization paying for them. On others you will see something like "Paid for by the committee to elect Elmo Coltraine for Parish President and to destroy the reputation of that no account low down polecat Cletus Beauregard LeCroix III"
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Here political commercials are outlawed on TV since TV commercials affect people on an emotional level more than the intellectual, and that very little of depth can be conveyed in such limited time. Political commercials are still legal in printed media for the opposite reason ... it appeals to the intellect rather than your emotions, and enough can be written on half a newspaper page to give some political depth to the message. Of course it is also illegal to lie in commercials here ... so perhaps the ban on political commercials are superfluous. ;)
When did I say I didn't like American politics? It doesn't interest me much, but it can be fun and enlightening to discuss politics.
I can't remember the last time there was a thread about Norwegian or EU politics here.
So where you live, the government thinks people are too stupid to view a commercial and decide for themselves what they consider "emotional" content. So your government decides what the people see on TV based on how intelligent they think the people are. They assume people are stupid and cannot view a tv ad without getting "emotional"
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Correct, and they are right.
so you agree that you are to stupid to view a commercial ?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The political parties wouldn't spend millions on commercials if they didn't have the desired effect on people.
you already answered my question, thanks :)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
So ... are you a sociopath or just too stupid to realise you're being affected? ;)
man, you are on the losing end of this argument yet you persist.....
You have essentially agreed that your government thinks you are too stupid to view a political commercial. You have agreed that you personally are too stupid to interpret a commercial, then you call me a "sociopath" for pointing this out?
I will boldy tell you that I am smart enough to view a commercial and make up my own mind regarding it's content.
-
TIVO likes them
she eats them up just as fast as any car, beer, reality show commercial
if someone lets a commercial sway their political convictions - they have the mental prowess of a dumbacrat :)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
If you say you're not emotionally affected by commercials then you're either a sociopath, too stupid to realise it, or a liar.
What really gets me is puppies. Soft, warm, fuzzy, cute, cuddly puppies. When I see a commercial with a puppy, I walk down to the store like an automaton and buy whatever the commercial told me to buy.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well, that is a bit oversimplified, but in essence correct. If the commercial is aimed at men it will contain women. If it is aimed at women it will most likely contain children.
What about puppies? Are you saying that because my emotional hit button is puppies I am neither a man nor a woman? Are you saying I am some sort of non human? Why you #@%& son of &$#@!
-
Children are our future. Might as well start to think like me now and save time.
-
What about Philadelphia, Gynter? You like Philadelphia?
-
Well I thought you were either jewish or WC Feilds.
WC hated kids, dogs, and Philadelphia but if you are indifferent on Philly, you are obviously not WC.
But you do follow the abortion policy of the National Jewish Confederation, which believes it is an abortion until the child graduates from medical school.
{please... joke.... it's a joke}
-
if commercials have no effect then why is is so much of it on american TV? why would the candidates need it if it has no effect?.....is it just to support marketing/advertising jobs? :D
Damn, i better get myself a new education cause marketing school must have been a total waste of my money. :(
-
It certainly has effect, but I watched the 'Cat Fight' commercials, yet I do not drink Miller Lite.
I see Pepsi and Coke commercials yet I don't drink those either.
I am not a customer of McDonalds more that two or three times a year. Apparently my incredible self control has built a mental barrier to render me immune to the subliminal mind control techniques used by corporate America.
I will see untold numbers of Bush and Kerry ads in the next 8 months yet it will not effect my decision. Something in an ad my spark my interest, and I will investigate and make up my mind based upon that investigation.
-
if those ads are not gonna effect your decision then what are they good for?
IF something in one of those ads sparks your interest and you investigate, then havent you infact been effected?
Relax, not trying to pick a fight here, just curious.
:)
-
I'll give you the effect of sparking my investigation... but the ad will not be the majority or even a significant minority of the data required to convince me.
Advertisements are very soft in their ability to sell any product.
If I became a loyal customer of Coke, then Pepsi ads would have been a failure even though they are substantially the same as Coke ads. I doubt that all the scientific testing and focus groups used in the advertising industry have shed light on human behavior more than just scratching the surface.
If we knew how the public would accept something, we would not have been surprized by the huge box office of Gibson's Passion.
-
you are correct in that one good or ever a thousand extremly good pepsi ads will never get you to switch if you are a loyal coke user :D but that is not the idea either.
Every day a new generation of consumers get to the point where they choose one product over another and the company that does not have any ads or their brand exposed looses the battle for those simply because they are not aware of that brand. Making existing coke addicts switch to pepsi is simly to expencive and not worthwhile.
If you are in the market for a new computer and you have never owned one before then you will most likely choose the brandname that you have heard before. If you have never heard of Dell you will go for Gateway if you have heard the name before.
-
Advertising is extremely important in that if no one knows of your product, no one will buy. However if you have a significantly better product (as political parties attest they do) than you would not need to match advertising dollar for dollar.
Political ads do try to change minds, not just make up new ones. If it was just the new ones that ads were interested in issues of the aged would not take the forefront of the issues discussed.
Most retired people have been voting their respective party line for decades and parties struggle for the votes from this group.
As one ad blends into another somehow through the din a voters view clears and his decision is made. Theories of how this happens are many and differing, and consistantly changing with the issues.
In 1964, LBJ ran a very powerful commercial suggesting the danger of voting for Goldwater who was percived a hawk in the Vietnam years. The advertisment was a video of a small girl picking flowers while a countdown to a nuclear detonation was occuring in the background. When the detonation occured a voiceover of Johnson siad, 'These are the stakes... we must all learn to live together or we must die."
While it is widely remembered, the effect in 1964 was muted. It seemed to harden opinions rather than change them.
-
The problem, GS, is that you look at some lower middle class, single mother of three in Dothan Alabama, and decide to sell her on your candidate.
The polsters tell you that child care and schools are the way to do it, so you design your campaign around those issues, and come to find out in the exit polls that she voted because of drug benifits in social security because of her elderly parents and foreign policy due to her brother serving in the military.
Child care and schools are issues number six and seven in the national election, because her daddy always told her of them bums on the school board is who you should blame if your kid's school was bad, throw those bums out, and she sould lean on the church and her kin for help with taking care of the kids.
The most interesting thing about the flowerchild commercial is that it aired once it did not make a cup of spit worth of difference in the '64 election.
-
i think they are for the mindless few who do not follow politics and know zero difference btwn lib and rep and who still find the energy to get their couch potato arse up and to the voting booth while remebering only the last catchy phrase from the last commercial that past b4 their blurry eyes
or are bused to the booth with the promise of free cigs and beer if they check the "D" box :)
-
So the fact that money is spent is proof that it is spent wisely. Okay....
-
Didn't say that. Just questioning your reasoning.
I think Coke or Budweiser could coast for quite a while on half their ad budget and do nicely. But as soon as a slip in name recognition occurs, they have waited too long in getting back to the ad grind.
Bush and Kerry put ads out to stimulate water cooler discussion. That is where the true convincing happens. Friends and coworkers discussing politics, not 30 seconds of radio or TV.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
What really gets me is puppies. Soft, warm, fuzzy, cute, cuddly puppies. When I see a commercial with a puppy, I walk down to the store like an automaton and buy whatever the commercial told me to buy.
Hey!!! Me too!!!
-
Originally posted by GScholz
ROFL!!! Yeeeeeees, the USA is the trendsetter of the gay-rights movement. What a moron!
Tell me one thing: These people are not likely to reproduce anyway. Why make their lives more difficult? If they want to marry in say a civil union, why not let them? If some church wants to accept gay marriages, why not let them? Why should the government interfere in these matters?
Here we have a priest as prime minister, and even he says that the government should not interfere in matters of church. Even when a gay man was ordained as a priest by one of our Bishops and the church was heavily engaged in internal fighting over the issue, our clergyman prime minister said he would not comment on matters of the church as long as he was in office. Church and government should be separate. The "vice-president" of our right-wing party Höyre (Right) is gay, and currently serving as our financial minister ... yes, our most prominent RIGHT-WING party has a gay second in command. You guys are in the stone age.
Ahhh....the wisdom of men....thanks for the lesson in self ordained truth.
BTW....you're right about the commercials.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Oh my God, a religious zealot. Wouldn't surprise me if you're a latent homosexual repressing your sexuality by acting all macho and "holy" ... Say, do you drive a Jeep by any chance? If not, perhaps a big SUV of some sort ... makes you feel like a man don't it? When you pray at night, do you ask for forgiveness for your dirty, sinful thoughts about other men, and ask the Invisible Man to give you the strength not to act on your urges? Yeah, thought so. The loudest homophobes are usually the most perverted ass-riders of the bunch. Speaking of which, shouldn't you go pray for forgiveness now? :rofl
Bitter and hateful little fella aren't ya?
-
Bitter and hateful little fella aren't ya?
He sure is, but go pointing that else or he will claim he is the victim of an unprovoked personal attack.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why don't you guys just do yourselves a favor ... outlaw political commercials.
I'm against political jokes of any kind. We've already elected or appointed enough of them already. :lol
-
Originally posted by storch
. I believe a woman has the right to choose not to become pregnant. She does not have the right to commit infanticide
:lol And the 14 year old who chooses not to be raped by Uncle Joe but gets knocked up as she gets knocked around?
-
Originally posted by Rude
Bitter and hateful little fella aren't ya?
gotta be careful...me thinks some people on this BB are a little suspect......a little light in the loafers if you get my drift.
-
???? 10,000,000 ?
did I mention anything about you jerking off? You, storch, you're murdering millions of sperm that might otherwise bring more life to this planet. then, on the other hand, given that it's your seed, that might not be such a bad thing...:D
-
Originally posted by storch
Yes the number was(.............) These potential tax payers will be sorely missed. I'm surprised at your position. You look like a black person in your avatar. Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the nation was founded by Margaret Sanger. Her sole purpose for supporting abortions was the elimination of your race. Her organization is largely succeeding in this endeavor. Here in South Florida all the Planned Parenthood offices are in Black/Hispanic communities. I guess they know where to find their clientel.
Nice twist, still doesn't change the issue at hand though. Irregardless of how ridiculous the starting philosophy of planned parenthood might have been, they still are one of the few refuges in the entire US for women in trouble. Women who would otherwise be either forced to do themselves what the community didn't provide a facility for, or be stuck with an unwanted child. This child btw, is someone who does not have a very good perspective of a pleasant, loving structured youth and therefore life, it should not be considered merely a potential taxpayer...
-
You're absolutely right about the spelling (redundancy). That is where the sanity in your post ended anyway but let's take a light-hearted look at it, for amusement's sake probably.
My country is at the forefront of modern legislation. Compassion and realism are combined into one of the best compromises feasible, both regarding abortions and euthanasia. A few years ago virtually every nation was very outspoken in its condemning of our policies in both (as in some other fields). More recently about all European countries have sent in researchers and diplomats to find out how we managed to balance personal freedoms with ethical considerations and now most of them are gradually adopting the same or similar policies.
Then about the poor ignorant young lady... I find it rather sad you credit yourself with the moral authority to diagnose her as poor and ignorant, while nowadays the majority of teens is surprisingly independent, responsible and have planned their lives in an impressive way. They deserve the right to decide whether they want to share that live with a child at that particular moment or not. And noone should be able to interfere with that right, especially not your self-declared moral superiority and condescending attitude towards others with less antiquated beliefs.
About the alleged heroine cafés, I don't think I should dignify that ridiculous statement with a reply, it does say a lot about yourself though.
-
Any truth to this GScholz?
http://www.worldmag.com/world/issue/03-06-04/cover_2.asp
-
GScholz, yes, his conclusions are obviously suspect. I didn't realize there had been such dramatic changes in social norms in your part of the world though.
-
Originally posted by storch
And your world view exemplifies the sad state of european morality as it exists today. your country is in the forefront alright. that is the forefront of postmodern moral relativism. in a light-hearted sort of way of course. apparently you missed the intended pun, indeed all pregnant teens are not poor but in fact most are from the solid middle class. Their well orchestrated lives produce unwanted pregnancies? no matter. God's truths are as relevant today as they were when he created time. you continue to hold to your relative views. after all youv'e been wrong before haven't you? :) What no comment about the consistent growth in the third world populace in europe? :)
Obviously 'poor' was never a measure of wealth or ack thereof, on what grounds do you assume that I interpreted it that way? And of course I hold on to my relative views, as do you, just refer to the sentence above 'God's truths are as relevant today as they were when he created time', that is your view. But it is as relative as mine and both will remain so. And yes I have been wrong, haven't we all? As the rest of your post, it strikes me as completely useless and irrelevant.
BTW tell me, to which groups do you refer when you're talking about the 'third world populace' in Europe, before I misinterpret your relative views.
-
Originally posted by storch
Her sole purpose for supporting abortions was the elimination of your race. Her organization is largely succeeding in this endeavor...
Well, she's not the only one interestred in eliminating my race..but no, she's not succeeding. Nor will you succeed in attempting to bring race into this thread....I'm out of here
-
I must be hard for people who believe in a fairy tale of a virgin mother and the dead resurrecting to comprehend homosexuallity.
It's just unnatural. :rofl :rofl :rofl :aok