Tag Archives: The Bulwark

Is This Missouri Republican’s TV Spot the Most Racist Campaign Ad of 2024?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and checking out Jim Swift’s Overtime newsletter at The Bulwark, when I came across this item.

Meanwhile, in Missouri… Gubernatorial candidate Bill Eigel seems to have hired ad people similarly offensive and cringeworthy to Kelly Loeffler’s.

You gotta see it to believe it, Doc.

What the hell, right?

– GOPsmacked

Dear GS,

There is no bottom to that well.

As the redoubtable Charlie Sykes has noted, racism was once a recessive gene in the Republican Party. With the advent of Trumpism, it’s become the dominant one.

Exhibit Umpteen, via Joe Perticone’s Press Pass newsletter at The Bulwark, is the GOP’s mad rush to label Kamala Harris a “DEI hire.” After calling the roll of several House Republicans who led the charge, Perticone highlighted the verbal assault from this media lowlife.

Alec Lace, a podcast host and right wing commentator, brought things even lower. On Fox Business, he could not stop saying “DEI” (the repetitions making clear exactly what he meant by it) and suggested Harris has slept her way to her presumptive spot on the Democratic ticket:

There’s the DEI press secretary telling you that the DEI vice president is the future of the party here. And so the future looks kinda dim for the Democrats here, but this is no shocker, either. Kamala Harris—she’s the original “hawk tuah” girl, that’s the way she got where she is, and the party’s going downhill if it’s in her hands.

(Perticone provided this gloss for those of you keeping score at home: “Neither Fox host on the panel objected to Lace’s crass insults, which referenced a recent viral video in which a woman describes—well, we’ll just call it a sex act.”)

No bottom . . .

But back to the original question: Is Bill Eigel’s Translator spot the most racist campaign ad of the 2024 election cycle?

The Doc’s diagnosis: It’ll do until something even more vile comes along.

How Can an Ad Claim That Donald Trump ‘Couldn’t Be Hired at a Local Mall’?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jim Swift’s Overtime newsletter from The Bulwark, when I came across this item about a new ad campaign from Republican Voters Against Trump.

No mall would hire Trump… So why would we make him President again? A new ad from our friends at RVAT airing on TV and online in battleground states.

I dunno, Doc – does that sound right to you? Donald Trump does have an awful lot of experience in sales.

– Mall Rat

Dear MR,

Yeah, the thing with Trump is, so much of what he’s sold during his career has been irregular.

Beyond that, the rest of his resumé is even more problematic, as this RVAT press release explains.

WASHINGTON – April 22, 2024 – Today Republican Voters Against Trump launched a new six-figure ad campaign as part of an ongoing $50 million campaign, highlighting Donald Trump’s 88 felony charges.

The ad uses first-person hidden-camera footage of a job applicant going to several stores and repeatedly being rejected after sharing that he has been indicted for stealing classified documents, paying hush money to porn stars, and attempting to overturn an election.

Here’s how that worked out.

The ad is scheduled to run nationally on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” and digitally in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Republican Voters Against Trump is yet another effort from the irrepressible Sarah Longwell, publisher of The Bulwark, impresario of The Focus Group Podcast, and founder of Republican Voters Against Trump/Republican Accountability Project.

Sarah Longwell is the undisputed Queen of Never Trumpers.

Ask for her by name.

Why Does a Snoopy Watch Get a Full-Page Teaser Ad in the New York Times?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and leafing through the New York Times, when I came across this full-page ad on A5.

What’s going on here, Doc? Is there a moon landing scheduled for later this month? Is Elon Musk planning to SpaceX his Shiba Inu Floki up there? What am I missing?

– Moon Stuck

Dear MS,

What you missed was the small © 2024 Peanuts Worldwide LLC in the lower right-hand corner of the ad. Plug that into the Googletron and you get this piece from MGB Watches, which notes that the ad also ran in The Guardian newspaper.

SNOOPY MOONSWATCH RELEASE DATE CONFIRMED – 26.03.24

The much awaited buzz surrounding the Snoopy MoonSwatch has reached its peak, as another official teaser graces The Guardian newspaper today. Capturing attention with an intriguing image of a paw print imprinted on the Moon’s surface, it unmistakably announces the release date of a Snoopy MoonSwatch: 26.03.24! . . .

26th March is such a significant date for the MoonSwatch as it marks the two year anniversary: On March 26th, 2022, Swatch unveiled the incredibly successful collection, consisting of the much loved 11x planet themed Omega x Swatch Speedmaster Watches.

For those of you keeping score at home, not everyone loved the Omega x Swatch collection, as this letter to the Doc two years ago detailed.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jonathan V. Last’s Triad newsletter at The Bulwark, when I came across this item.

3. Watch Talk

It’s been a while since and I know that this if [sic] frivolous, but this just happened:

I have no words.

Taking the iconic Speedmaster Professional—the watch that went to the frickin’ moon—and turning it into a candy-colored hunk of plastic quartz . . . this is an abomination. An offense against God and nature. It’s like the Louvre partnering with Oscar Mayer to sell a Bologna Lisa.

So here’s my question, Doc: Do you want to see the Bologna Lisa as badly as I do?

– Swatched at Birth

Fun fact to know and tell, via Bianca Bosker’s “Lost Basquiats” piece in The Atlantic: “Researchers at the City University of New York instructed study participants to imagine that the Mona Lisa had been destroyed in a fire and asked them whether they’d rather see its ashes or a copy that not even connoisseurs could distinguish from the original. Eighty percent picked the ashes.”

But back to MoonSwatches. Those Snoopy newspaper ads weren’t even the first teasers for the new timepiece, as Wired’s Jeremy White reported several months ago.

Considering the long-established connection between Snoopy and Omega, after the original MoonSwatch caused pandemonium around the globe in 2022 and reinvigorated Swatch’s previously flagging fortunes, it’s hardly surprising that the brand should mine this rich Schulz seam to tease a coming Snoopy MoonSwatch.

There’s only one thing that could stop this cartoon-collaboration MoonSwatch from being the most popular version of the series since the Omega X Swatch’s frenzied launch: if it’s as unimaginative and understated as the Moonshine Gold editions that followed the bright and bold original MoonSwatches.

The Doc’s diagnosis: There’s no guarantee watch nerds will be over the moon for the new Snoopy-on-a-strap when it finally lands, either.

Did Adam Schiff’s Ad Strategy Really ‘Rig’ The California Senate Primary?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around Xitter, when I came across this tweet in “semi-recovered lawyer” George Conway’s feed.

@Out5p0ken elaborated in a reply:”Seriously, wtf and let’s all thank her for giving away a House seat and then calling the election rigged and not congratulating Schiff. Deplorable.”

What’s the deal here, Doc. Just sour grapes? Or something more rigorous?

– Katie Didn’t

Dear KD,

Katie Porter is upset because, as Joe Perticone reported in The Bulwark, “[Adam] Schiff’s campaign and his allies have shelled out millions of dollars to boost [Republican candidate Steve] Garvey’s bid and box out the other Democrats” in California’s jungle primary for the seat vacated by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

Here’s a representative sample of the knee-buckling $11 million worth of ads the Schiff forces ran teeing up the former pro baseball player for GOP voters.

Post-primary, Porter cried foul, as The Daily Beast’s Matt Lewis noted.

In a tweet that has evoked controversy, Porter complained that her campaign had to withstand “3 to 1 in TV spending and an onslaught of billionaires spending millions to rig this election.”

And in a weak-sauce follow-up statement meant to clarify her tweet, Porter explained that “rigged” means “manipulated by dishonest means”—and that billionaires spending money to defeat her constitutes “dishonest means to manipulate an outcome.”

Some of Porter’s supporters protested Schiff’s strategy as “sexist and cynical” in pushing her aside for another male candidate. But that wasn’t the only factor in holding Porter to a disappointing 14% of the primary vote. As Jill Cowan reported in the New York Times, “[i]n the final weeks of the campaign, a cryptocurrency super PAC spent millions on ads attacking Ms. Porter, who has supported more regulations on the industry and has rebuked various corporate leaders in congressional hearings.”

Beyond that, there’s this inconvenient fact, which Maeve Reston pointed out in the Washington Post: “[T]o hold down Garvey’s support, Porter . . . countered with similar tactics — running at least a half-million dollars in ads raising the profile of another long-shot GOP Senate contender, Eric Early.”

Sauce for the gander, anyone?

Will Any Voters Really Care About Biden’s Ad Attacking Trump’s NATO Attack?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and reading Jim Swift’s Overtime post at The Bulwark, when I came across this item.

Happy Friday! The Biden campaign hit Donald Trump with a new ad about NATO. It’s a little wonky, but still, compelling.

Really, Doc? Trump’s trashing of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is going to put a dent in his poll numbers when 91 felony charges, a sexual assault conviction, and an endless series of lies and grifts haven’t? Does that seem reasonable to you?

– Trump Stumped

Dear TS,

According to this New York Times report by Nicholas Nehamas, the Biden campaign “is running [this] digital ad in three states — Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — that have significant populations of voters with Eastern European roots.”

The ad notes that every president since Harry Truman has been a rock-solid supporter of NATO – except for Donald Trump, who wants to walk away from NATO and its Article 5 mutual defense pact. (The spot also notes that Article 5 has been invoked exactly one time: in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on America.)

Trump’s “you gotta pay” message to NATO members, the ad concludes, is shameful, weak, dangerous, and un-American. (It’s also the unofficial slogan of made mobsters, but why get technical about it. Not to mention Trump’s lifelong commitment to stiffing his own creditors.)

As NBC News White House correspondent Monica Alba writes, “[the] campaign is aiming to reach the more than 2.5 million Americans who identify as Polish, Finnish, Norwegian, Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian — all NATO countries that share a border with Russia.”

That doesn’t seem like much, until you break down Trump’s likely electoral math: About 30 to 35 percent of his voters are ride-or-die MAGA who are largely there for the cruelty and the crazy; then you’ve got maybe 10 percent of voters who mumble “something something something Dementia Joe.”

It’s the next four or five percent who will decide the 2024 presidential election.  This Biden ad might tell us whether Article 5 works for  ballots as well as bullets.

Is Presidential TV Ad Spending Really Idiotic, Like Vivek Ramaswamy Says?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around Xitter, when I came across this post on David Axelrod’s feed addressing the latest nonsense from Vivek Ramasmarmy – sorry, Ramaswamy.

Two questions for you, Doc – is presidential TV ad spending more idiotic than Vivek Ramaswamy? Or is it vice versa?

– On the Spot

Dear OtS,

This one looks like a photo finish, yeah?

Let’s start with Vivek Ramaswamy’s X-clusion of TV spots from his primary campaign.

Given that Ramaswamy spent $200,000 on TV ads during the first half of December, as NPR’s Ashley Lopez reported, presumably he’s had some kind of IQ boost in the past few weeks. Regardless, his campaign told NPR it hasn’t entirely stopped spending on ads.

“Our spending levels haven’t changed—we’re just following the data,” said campaign spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin. “We are focused on bringing out the voters we’ve identified—best way to reach them is using addressable advertising, mail, text, live calls and doors to communicate with our voters on Vivek’s vision for America, making their plan to caucus and turning them out.”

Yeah – that and going to six Iowa Pizza Ranches in one day might actually get you within 40 points of Donald Trump. Or maybe not, considering that some – like the New Republic’s Jason Linkins – think you might not even make it to caucus night.

As for how idiotic presidential TV ad spending in general might be, it certainly hasn’t paid off for the super PACs that have dropped tens of millions of dollars touting presidential primary hopefuls, as The Bulwark’s Tim Miller has painstakingly documented.

The Super PACs Are Worthless. Donors Should Stop Torching Their Cash.

SUPER PACS FOR SEVERAL GOP CANDIDATES challenging Donald Trump have raised hundreds of millions of dollars to help fund efforts to displace him as the party’s nominee—and they have absolutely nothing to show for it.

No progress. No signs of life. No movement. Nada.

The impotence of the super PAC efforts is an all-the-more-inviting target for ridicule when you consider that this entire strategic approach was discredited in the 2016 and 2020 presidential races. (I can speak from firsthand Jeb! experience about the law of diminishing returns on super PAC dollars.)

Case in point: The pro-DeSantis super PAC Nevar Back Down, whose $25 million worth of ads have gone over like the metric system, rocketing the Florida governor from over 30% in the national polls to 11.7% in ten short months.

So yeah, some presidential ad spending is in fact idiotic. But that doesn’t make Vivek Ramaswamy any smarter.

Aren’t the Chris Christie Super PAC Ads Actually Telling It Like It Isn’t?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and poking around Politico, when I came across Alex Isenstadt’s piece about Chris Christie kneecapping Nikki Haley in the New Hampshire presidential primary.

Chris Christie has singularly devoted his presidential campaign to tearing down Donald Trump.

But with the start of the primaries just a few weeks away, some top Republicans in New Hampshire say Christie is now positioned to help pave the way for Trump’s nomination by siphoning votes away from Nikki Haley, Trump’s closest-polling competitor in the state.

“Chris Christie is a monumental problem for Nikki Haley,” said Mike Dennehy, a former Republican National committeeman from New Hampshire who is neutral in the race. “They are both currently splitting the Independent vote, and Haley desperately needs those votes if she is to have a chance of knocking off Trump in New Hampshire.”

Drive Haley nuts graf: “Christie advisers said no one has asked the candidate to drop out. And there is no indication he is slowing down either. Tell It Like It Is PAC, a pro-Christie outside group, is running a $3.5 million TV advertising campaign in New Hampshire.”

Three and a half million to prop up a candidate the majority of Republican primary voters totally hate? They’d do better setting their money on fire and posting the video to YouTube. That would probably have a more lasting impact, don’t you think, Doc?

– Fired Up

Dear FU,

Chris Christie is the guest who’s really fun and entertaining until he refuses to leave the dinner party when the clock strikes midnight. Instead, he just keeps banging on about himself, as this press release from the pro-Christie PAC indicates.

With the New Hampshire primary less than six weeks away, and on the heels of a winning debate performance, Tell It Like It Is PAC launched its largest paid media campaign of the cycle in New Hampshire: $3.5 million dollars across broadcast, cable, statewide digital and radio.

Entitled “Unacceptable,” the :30 second spot . . . focuses on not only core policy issues important to New Hampshire voters (inflation and immigration), but also reminds voters of the bold distinction between Governor Christie and the other candidates in the race: the willingness to tell the truth about former President Donald Trump.

Here’s the spot.

Christie might in fact be “the only candidate with the courage to tell the truth and the experience to get it done,” but whatever “it” is most certainly does not include winning New Hampshire, never mind the GOP presidential nomination.

Not with numbers like these (via FiveThirtyEight) in this month’s poll from Saint Anselm College Survey Center . . .

. . . or these from American Research Group (which gets a C+ rating at FiveThirtyEight).

Roll your own from those polls. As for actually telling it like it is, listen to The Bulwark’s publisher Sarah Longwell on The Focus Group Podcast (around 18:19).

When the New York Times called me recently for a story and it was like, lots of people are saying Christie should drop out and like, why don’t you think he is or whatever. And I was like, I got I got all mad and I was like, because time is a flat circle. And everybody insists on playing out the 2016 primary beat for beat exactly like it was back then. And Chris Christie needs to drop out instead of doing what he did to Marco Rubio . . .

He’s just hurting Nikki now. Anything he does, it’s not helping her. I don’t know what he thinks he’s doing. It’s time. It’s time, buddy. Good job. I appreciate what you’ve done, but you’ve got to show now that it is more than your ego at work here and you are ready to actually be helpful to some of these other candidates.

Question is, does Chris Christie have the courage to get that done? Or will he just keep telling it like it isn’t.

Is Donald Trump Really Marketing Tiny Pieces of His Mugshot Suit?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and listening to The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell and Jonathan V. Last on The Secret Podcast, when JVL started talking about Donald Trump’s latest NFT (non-fungible token) grift.

Donald Trump this week announced a new wave of his NFTs, and these are the Mugshot series.

Hmm where all of the pictures have are, you know riffing off of his mugshot glare Yeah, and if you buy a hundred of them, which I believe is $10,000 worth so if you if you buy $10,000 worth of these you will also get a Physical trading card like a like a baseball card here.

Seriously, Doc – ten grand for a Trump trading card? Please tell me that is . . . 

– Not Freaking True

Dear NFT,

Truer than anything Donald Trump ever says, I’m sorry to report.

Start with Trump’s mug shot, taken last summer in a Georgia courthouse.

That was just raw material, though, as Vanessa Friedman wrote in the New York Times.

[T]his week, NFT INT, the official licensee of the Trump name and image for digital trading cards, began selling a special “Mugshot Edition” NFT set that includes, for a certain few willing to buy the whole thing, pieces of the blue suit and red tie Mr. Trump wore in the photo.

Or, as the NFT INT website calls the garment, “The most historically significant artifact in American history.”

The goods, for those of you keeping score at home.

That would be what’s known in the business as a “relic card” – like a piece of the True Cross relic, which plays nicely into the whole Orange Jesus thing. The Times piece notes that there are “enough tiny suit pieces for 2,024 buyers.” Some coincidence, eh?

The Doc’s diagnosis: This is just the latest indication that everything in Donald Trump’s life is transactional, right down to the clothes off his back.

Don’t even wanna know what might be next.

Why Is Nikki Haley Barely Nicking Donald Trump in Her First Iowa TV Spot?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and paging through the Weekend Wall Street Journal, when I came across this interview with Nikki Haley based on a sit-down the former South Carolina governor and U.N. Ambassador in the Trump administration had with the Journal’s editorial board.

Drove-me-nuts graf:

She is careful to give her former boss his due: “I think President Trump was the right president at the right time,” she says. “I really do.” But “chaos follows him wherever he goes. And every one of you knows I’m right.” She scans the room. “When the world is on fire and our country is completely distracted, we can’t continue down this chaotic path.”

Really? That’s her brief for replacing the guy who’s ahead of her by 50 points in polls and 91 felony counts in courts of law? He’s a chaos magnet? What the hell, Doc.

– Nik-Pikki

Dear NP,

Yeah, you’re not the only one eye-rolling about Haley’s rolling over for Trump. Here’s what The Bulwark’s Will Saletan wrote on Substack the other day.

Have you heard Nikki Haley’s pathetically weak description of Trump’s behavior? She says “rightly or wrongly, chaos follows him.” In today’s @The Bulwark podcast, @Charlie Sykes mocks her evasive language. “It’s a little bit like saying, ‘You know, wherever Jeffrey Dahmer goes, people are found dead.'” lnk.thebulwark.com/47Mq34r

Haley is just as mealy-mouthed in her first Iowa TV spot.

“A president must have moral clarity,” she says, “and know the difference between good and evil. Today, China, Russia, and Iran are advancing . . .”

And etc.

Oh, wait – Haley also says, “it’s time for a new generation of conservative leadership. We have to leave behind the chaos and drama of the past, and strengthen our country, our pride, and our purpose.”

The Doc believes that pitch was far more forceful in the original Esperanto.

To call Haley’s alleged presidential primary campaign against Donald Trump a pillow-fight is an insult to pajama parties worldwide.

And yet . . .

Another Bulwark stalwart, Jonathan V. Last, presented two theories of the case in his Triad newsletter: “Theory #1: You attack Trump in order to take his voters from him . . . Theory #2: If you attack Trump then you can’t get a hearing from Republican voters.”

The first gambit represents a gargantuan task, likely requiring Haley to go after Trump hammer and tongue. Last says that might be possible, but makes this “utilitarian case” for the second approach.

The only way to have a chance to beat Trump is to pretend that he’s fine and to pledge to support him at some point down the road. The act of telling the truth about Trump, or saying that you might not support him in the future, disqualifies you in the minds of Republican voters.

And so Haley has to play it this way in order to have even a 1-in-100 chance.

Haley doubled down on her campaign of least resistance this weekend in an interview with ABC News Live Prime anchor Linsey Davis.

“It’s not about fitness. I think he’s fit to be president. It’s ‘Should he be president?’ I don’t think he should be president. I thought he was the right president at the right time,” said Haley.

“We’ve got to look at the issues that we’re dealing with, coming forward with new solutions, not focusing on negativity and baggage of the past. So it’s not about being fit. It’s just I don’t think he’s the right person to be president,” she added.

The Doc’s diagnosis: If Nikki Haley truly believes the Cheeto-in-Chief is fit to be president, then she manifestly is not.

Could Republican Accountability Project’s Ads Truly Hold Trump Accountable?

by doctorads

Well the Doc opened up the old mailbag today and here’s what poured out.

Dear Dr. Ads,

There I was, minding my own business and toodling around Twitter, when I came across this tweet about a GOP advocacy group throwing Donald Trump’s words back in his face.

The Republican Accountability Project? Who are those masked mensches, Doc?

– Investigative RAPorter

Dear Raporter,

The Republican Accountability Project is led by Ms. Mensch (and publisher of The Bulwark) Sarah Longwell, who explained the group’s thinking to  HuffPost’s Ed Mazza.

“Donald Trump likes to talk about throwing his political opponents in jail for mishandling classified documents, but he’s the one who stole government secrets from the White House and refused to give them back,” Sarah Longwell, the organization’s executive director, said in a news release. “We’re reminding Republican viewers that he should be held to his own standard.”

Here’s the spot.

An accounting of the ad’s reach: 322,000 views on YouTube, not to mention that million-dollar ad buy.

Two days ago RAP released this digital spot as a chaser.

Its accounting: 994,000 views on Twitter.

The Doc’s diagnosis: Pretty effective, by all accounts.