October 9, 2006

Idea: Approve of more than just “this message.”

Daisy - ApprovedSince Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in 2002, candidates for federal office must state their approval of campaign ads. Most frequently, we hear the phrase, “I’m [candidate’s name] and I approve this message.” Sometimes, to make it less awkward, the statement is lengthened along the lines of, “I’m [candidate’s name] and I approve this message because it’s time to stop playing around in Congress, and time to start getting things done.”

Well I think an effective ad could be made that goes a step further and really embraces the “I approve this message” line as part of its campaign. It could go something like this:

“I’m John Candidate and I disapprove of the message this administration is sending the world by staying in Iraq. I disapprove of a the way the President is dealing with terrorism. And I certainly disapprove of the way Republicans are spending money with no regard as to who will pay the bills. It’s time to change the direction this country is headed. It’s time to remind the world through our actions that America is a noble country, a leader in ethics, economy, and education.

I approve of a plan to bring American kids back to school where they will recieve a top level education. I approve of getting health care where it’s needed most. I approve of helping Iraq get back on its feet and bringing our troops home. I approve of actions that send a message to the world that America is prouder, stronger, and safer than it ever has been.

I am John Candidate. And I approve this message.”

Of course, all those glittering generalities would be replaced by meaningful specifics and substance, but you get the idea.



I like it. If I ever run for office, I’d try to word my commercial in the same manner.

“all those glittering generalities would be replaced by meaningful specifics and substance”

Good luck with that!

“recieve a top level education”
Yup, that shore is soarly nieded! ;-)

>”“all those glittering generalities >would be replaced by meaningful >specifics and substance”
>Good luck with that!
>Posted by: nonegatives”

You’d need it. If you say you approved of the plan that would fund updated textbooks for public schools by taking .01% of this tax and reallocating it and .02% of this tax and reallocating THAT and adding a .001% tax on oil, with specifics that the textbooks would contain updated fact-findings on hostorical figures and events and more current theories on evolution and biologies….

Well, you’d lose the average viewer in that 30 seconds you have to talk. Better to just say “I want to give more money to the schools.”