Patterico's Pontifications

5/5/2020

New Political Ad: Mourning In America

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:07 am



[guest post by Dana]

I have been posting current political ads from various campaigns and political groups. I don’t know to what degree they actually influence voters, but the good ones tap into the mood of America, whether a righteous anger, or providing a needed dose of hope. Today’s ad is from The Lincoln Project:

In 1984 Ronald Reagan’s campaign launched an iconic and memorable political ad called “Morning in America.” ‘Morning’ highlighted the positive impact of a first term Reagan presidency and presented an optimistic vision of an America that was prosperous and peaceful. Under Donald Trump, we instead face “Mourning in America.”

Here is President Trump’s reaction to the ad:

A group of RINO Republicans who failed badly 12 years ago, then again 8 years ago, and then got BADLY beaten by me, a political first timer, 4 years ago, have copied (no imagination) the concept of an ad from Ronald Reagan, “Morning in America”, doing everything possible to get even for all of their many failures. You see, these loser types don’t care about 252 new Federal Judges, 2 great Supreme Court Justices, a rebuilt military, a protected 2nd Amendment, biggest EVER Tax & Regulation cuts, and much more. I didn’t use any of them because they don’t know how to win, and their so-called Lincoln Project is a disgrace to Honest Abe. I don’t know what Kellyanne did to her deranged loser of a husband, Moonface, but it must have been really bad. John Weaver lost big for Kasich (to me). Crazed Rick Wilson lost for Evan “McMuffin” McMullin (to me). Steve Schmidt & Reed Galvin lost for John McCain, Romney’s campaign manager (?) lost big to “O”, & Jennifer Horn got thrown out of the New Hampshire Republican Party. They’re all LOSERS, but Abe Lincoln, Republican, is all smiles!

–Dana

56 Responses to “New Political Ad: Mourning In America”

  1. Good morning.

    Dana (0feb77)

  2. Oof that’s brutal. No wonder Trump lost his mind. RCocean is going to have words on this thread.

    Time123 (c9382b)

  3. Is ‘moonface’ an insult at George’s appearance? Or is it an obscure ethnic slur?

    Time123 (b87ded)

  4. I think he is insulting Conway’s appearance. That seems to be a preferred target of attack for Trump. It seems like he has more often gone after his enemy’s appearance rather than their ethnicity…not that he hasn’t done the latter, certainly…

    Dana (0feb77)

  5. Can we just ban Trump from Twitter for ethnic slurs? And refuse to cover him anymore. If we shun him, he might stop. And if he doesn’t, well we won’t hear him.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  6. Who finally told Trump Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, I wonder.

    nk (1d9030)

  7. Speaking of Trump and Lincoln:

    … for his latest Fox News event, they eventually landed on their favorite: the Lincoln Memorial, an iconic tribute to an American life, and one of Mr. Trump’s preferred places to add a prime-time touch of drama to his presidency.

    There was just one catch: While Mr. Trump and many other presidents have hosted inauguration concerts and gatherings on the memorial’s steps, any event meant to draw an audience inside the interior near Daniel Chester French’s sculpture of a seated Lincoln is prohibited. The area beginning with the marble staircase where the columns start constitutes a boundary protected by federal law.

    So on Sunday, when the president sat down with two Fox News anchors at Lincoln’s marbled feet during a coronavirus-focused virtual “town hall,” it was because a directive issued by David Bernhardt, the secretary of the interior, had allowed them to do so.

    Mr. Bernhardt, a former oil lobbyist whose Senate nomination was contested by Democrats who pointed to multiple accusations of conflicts of interest and ethical violations, ordered the memorial temporarily closed for the event, citing the coronavirus.

    “Given the extraordinary crisis that the American people have endured, and the need for the president to exercise a core governmental function to address the nation about an ongoing public-health crisis,” Mr. Bernhardt wrote in an order issued Friday, “I am exercising my authority to facilitate the opportunity for the president to conduct this address within the Lincoln Memorial.”

    The directive surprised officials at the National Park Service, who are used to scrambling to fill requests from the Trump White House, including making sure Army tanks can safely be parked on the National Mall, as they had to do last summer for an Independence Day celebration the president presided over using the Lincoln Memorial as a backdrop.

    Mr. Bernhardt’s action enraged critics, who complained that Mr. Trump had essentially conducted a partisan open mic night. But it pleased Mr. Trump and his aides, who had succeeded in creating the element of presidential sweep that he had been craving after weeks of negative news coverage and Twitter outbursts.

    A Fox News spokeswoman pointed to remarks during the telecast, when Bret Baier, an anchor who took turns asking questions with Martha MacCallum, his fellow moderator, and presenting videos of Fox viewers asking theirs, mentioned that the choice of venue had been Mr. Trump’s, and that it had stirred controversy.

    “And I did say this would be nice, but I thought it was your choice, not ours?” Mr. Trump responded. “And I had not heard, what can you criticize? I don’t think it’s ever been done, what we’re doing tonight, here, and I think it’s great for the American people to see, this is a great work of art, aside from the fact that that was a great man, this is a great work of art.”

    This made me remember when Obama had wanted to make a big splash by giving a speech from Germany’s historically symbolic Brandenburg Gate a la Reagan’s “Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!,” but was turned down (I think he was later invited to give a speech from the site…).

    Dana (0feb77)

  8. They are losers, but they aren’t Republicans, and they’ve never been conservatives. IRC, most of them are Strategists who helped Bush and McCain lose. Hopefully, they’ll help Joe Biden lose. I guess if you’re a liberal and you want to stand out from all the other liberals, you claim to be some sort of Republican. “Republicans for Joe Biden” “Republicans for Nancy Pelosi” “Republicans for Chuck Schumer”.

    LOL!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  9. I guess from your point of view the definition of Republican is ‘glorifies Donald Trump’.

    Time123 (b87ded)

  10. If they worked for Bush and Mccain and still call themselves Republican that’s at least two decades. That’s longer than Trump’s been calling himself a Republican.

    It’s a great ad, though a bit dramatic at the end where it asks if there will be an America in four years. There is still time for the GOP to dump Trump and the democrats to dump Biden. It’s only a matter of willpower. Trump could be 25th Amendmented or even impeached out of office in a heartbeat of people simply did what they knew was right.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  11. You know another time and place when Russian proxies called themselves Republicans? The Spanish Civil War. They even had an Abraham Lincoln Brigade.

    nk (1d9030)

  12. “Republicans for Chuck Schumer”.

    LOL!

    rcocean (1a839e) — 5/5/2020 @ 11:11 am

    https://theweek.com/speedreads/679072/trumps-family-donated-more-than-80000-chuck-schumer

    LOL!

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  13. “How ‘Kud-Low’ can you go?”

    Reaganomics.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  14. Here is a take on the ad that refers to it as the opposite Reaganism:

    What’s really disagreeable about the spot, though, is that it maligns the American people as a group of desperate and hopeless subjects sitting around waiting for their government to rescue them. This isn’t merely a preposterous misreading of today’s situation, its message is the antithesis of Reaganism. You don’t need to adulate the 40th president to know that his ads, and his personal inclination, celebrated the exceptional capacity of the American people to overcome adversity. A Reagan ad might have been patriotic, uplifting, and a bit fogyish by modern standards, but it would never have cynically painted us as a dreary, powerless, and self-pitying nation.

    Dana (0feb77)

  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhYJS80MgYA

    POTUS #40: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.

    whembly (51f28e)

  16. OT- The ‘humor’ of “Mourning In DCSCA’s America.”

    Why lawyers are a PITA #5678: Two lawyers in family; husband and wife. Parent passes; Will reads brothers to be co-Executors. One brother is family law lawyer and says he must waive executor status due to ‘conflict of interest’- other lawyer, who works for county government, says she cannot be involve in probate outside of her job or risk disbarment but offers referral list.

    Two lawyers, one recommendation: hire a lawyer!

    Seriously. ROFLMAOPIP. ‘Dying’ is as big a PITA as ‘living.’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  17. Trump has an established pattern of unwittingly drawing further negative attention to himself by loudly making everything about himself. This: We really need to change the name of the “Streisand Effect” to the Trump Effect. No one does it better than him.

    Dana (0feb77)

  18. Never forget: Reagan was a product of Hollywood, where image over substance ruled by projecting false realities. A Reagan ad– all of them— were simply selling the ‘product’- the image over substance– the sizzle, not the steak- as w/any other product to sell.

    ‘Morning In America’ was the handy work of ad man Hal Riney. Reagan was sold to suckers just like a sixpack of Bartles & Jaymes winecoolers.

    Google Hal. One of the adbiz’s best.

    “And we thank you for your support.” – B&J tag line.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  19. Trump has an established pattern of unwittingly drawing further negative attention to himself by loudly making everything about himself. This: We really need to change the name of the “Streisand Effect” to the Trump Effect. No one does it better than him.

    Dana (0feb77) — 5/5/2020 @ 12:07 pm

    He’s dumb and can’t distinguish between actual strength and bluster.

    Time123 (b87ded)

  20. Here is a take on the ad that refers to it as the opposite Reaganism:

    What’s really disagreeable about the spot, though, is that it maligns the American people as a group of desperate and hopeless subjects sitting around waiting for their government to rescue them. This isn’t merely a preposterous misreading of today’s situation, its message is the antithesis of Reaganism. You don’t need to adulate the 40th president to know that his ads, and his personal inclination, celebrated the exceptional capacity of the American people to overcome adversity. A Reagan ad might have been patriotic, uplifting, and a bit fogyish by modern standards, but it would never have cynically painted us as a dreary, powerless, and self-pitying nation.

    Dana (0feb77) — 5/5/2020 @ 11:55 am

    This is a fair point that rings hallow. This add tried to turn Trump’s playbook against him. Trump’s approach is simple. Everything that other people did is terrible. Everything I do is great. This directly attacks the second part of the Trump play. Because Trump starts from everything that came before is bad it doesn’t leave a lot of space to take the high road when attacking the add. I mean you can, but as I said, it rings hollow.

    As examples look at unemployment, trade deals and immigration. Trump said repeatedly that these things were all terrible and the results to stupid people etc etc. Once he was in charge he claimed that performance was better than we’ve ever had.

    That reminds me, anyone know if he ever got around to building a wall that Mexico paid for?

    Time123 (c9382b)

  21. Two lawyers, one recommendation: hire a lawyer

    1) Suggest Ms County Lawyer double check. There is generally an exception for non-compensated work, especially when done for other family members.

    2) Depending on details I obviously don’t know, and on how the will itself was written, you might not need a lawyer now. You might not even need probate.

    3) Didn’t the lawyer who wrote the will make sure the executors would be willing to do the necessary work when he wrote the will?

    4)Regardless, the lawyer who wrote the will is often the one who handles probate,

    Kishnevi (ddd75b)

  22. but it would never have cynically painted us as a dreary, powerless, and self-pitying nation.

    In other words, it wouldn’t be the sort of ad used by Trump in 2016.

    Kishnevi (ddd75b)

  23. Yeah, if only Trump weren’t so loud and vulgar then people like Dana would vote for him. LOL!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  24. Never try to please RINO’s or Never Trumpers – it can’t be done. They’ll find something wrong with Trump no matter what. I think Kristol, for example, and all the losers at the Lincoln project are really Democrat double agents. Its the only explaination of the Trump hatred and no-stop of record of bad advice and losing campaigns. Or take Jeff Flake according to his last interview he’ll not vote for Trump and may vote for Biden “It won’t be the first time I’ve Voted Democrat” says flaky Flake.

    So, its a question is Flake a D who turned R to get into office or a R who turned D now that he doesn’t have to go before the voters? In any case, his “advise” to R’s on on how to run their party is worthless. You might as well ask Joe Biden.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  25. It really bugs you how little respect Trump gets from so many life long conservatives. It’s almost as if they think being a conservative requires something unrelated to Trump….

    Time123 (c9382b)

  26. Never try to please RINO’s or Never Trumpers – it can’t be done.

    LOL You’re supporting Trump who is perpetually furious and insecure. Even Bush’s kind-hearted video set him on his ankle biting habit.

    So, its a question is Flake a D who turned R to get into office

    Trump supporters paranoid about democrats pretending to be republicans, not realizing Trump’s most significant act as president was to get his name on the checks he brags about giving everybody. No wall, no legal reform, no balanced budget, no wins, just cash from Trump*

    *yeah I know

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  27. Yeah, if only Trump weren’t so loud and vulgar then people like Dana would vote for him. LOL!

    Well, no, I still wouldn’t vote for him. I’m actually a person of more substance than that. And now I must retire to my fainting couch and clutch my pearls because you’ve made an LOL! at my expense…

    Dana (0feb77)

  28. Trump supporters paranoid about democrats pretending to be republicans,

    Given that Trump is a Democrat pretending to be a Republican.

    Kishnevi (8c03ee)

  29. This is what gets me. So many Trump supporting arguments just don’t make sense. They attack people for things that Trump is absurdly worse about. Therefore they are dishonest, insincere attacks.

    It’s like how many Trump fans will say the nastiest and least honest things they can think of, and then cry about bad faith or personal attacks. This is a moral decay, right before our eyes. Oh hey, maybe there’s a sliver of a chance Biden grabbed a woman sexually! Say the people who told us it doesn’t matter if the president did that. Bush didn’t listen to warnings about 9/11! Say the people who don’t care that Trump wanted to talk about vaping when blowing off a pandemic, years after destroying our nation’s capability for responding to a pandemic.

    Then they tell us not to assume the worst about Trump, after he talked crap about Obama being from Kenya for many years and bit Bush’s ankles incessently.

    And yes, Trump was a democrat and flipped to the GOP because it was easier for him. He’s shown zero sign he cares at all about any conservative ideology. All these complaints about RINOs and secret democrats are literally in support of someone who is a republican in name only.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  30. Happy Cinco – De – Economy Day

    mg (8cbc69)

  31. “Republicans for Nancy Pelosi” “Republicans for Chuck Schumer”.

    Trump donated heavily to both of them.

    Dave (1bb933)

  32. And now I must retire to my fainting couch and clutch my pearls because you’ve made an LOL! at my expense…

    We’re here for you, Dana.

    Dave (1bb933)

  33. Never try to please RINO’s or Never Trumpers – it can’t be done. They’ll find something wrong with Trump no matter what.

    Not being in either of those groups, I cannot speak for them. As a T-rump Objectivist, I can award what marks your cult leader has earned in full measure, while concurrently retaining the ability to look at who he was, who he is, and almost certainly will be. He is a thug, a liar, a cheat, and a profoundly sick person who, as predicted, has done enormous net damage to our nation.

    The term “RINO” is, BTW, one of the stupidest in current usage. Only people devoid of any knowledge of the history of the GOP, or how far from being appropriate to describe anyone of those you hate, are prone to its use.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  34. How about we call them collectivist pos, rags?

    mg (8cbc69)

  35. I guess you can call whoever whatever you can justify, mg.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  36. Impressive ad. Trump had better be ready for ads like this from the Dems, closer to the election.

    David in Cal (f8ea8c)

  37. @25 People think Trump is a terrible president because he’s a terrible president. They don’t need to make up reasons to dislike him as president, he hands them out on a silver platter.

    Nic (896fdf)

  38. (forgot to add) This ad is the best of they three you’ve linked on here so far. It goes after the intended target, effectively, and in a focused way.

    Nic (896fdf)

  39. Well, no, I still wouldn’t vote for him. I’m actually a person of more substance than that. And now I must retire to my fainting couch and clutch my pearls because you’ve made an LOL! at my expense…

    I’ve been reading you for quite a while, and have no idea what you believe or don’t believe – in terms of specific political policy. Or what you want the Federal Government to do – or not do – exactly. Saying you’d never vote for Trump because “I’m a person of substance” tells me little. I’m sure Left-wing Democrats and Right wing Republicans think they’re “People of substance” too.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  40. They’ll find something wrong with Trump no matter what.

    This is one of the weirder doctrines of Trumpism: That people are constantly going out of their way to try to find “something wrong with Trump” when they don’t really have an actual reason to disapprove. In the Trumpist mind — as in Trump’s own mind — there can’t really be anything wrong with him; it’s all concocted outrage, for no reason at all.

    The fact is: it takes no effort to “find something wrong with Trump,” when he hands it out daily on a silver platter. It’s actually hard to go a day without being hit by the horribleness of Trump, unless you’re totally tuned out of the news.

    Radegunda (354236)

  41. #36 — I’d like the federal government not to be run by a sociopath who loves chaos, who doesn’t really plan anything but only reacts, who’s ignorant and stupid but thinks he has the best brain in the universe, and whose first and greatest concern in any situation is his own ego.

    Radegunda (354236)

  42. Actually, DCSCA, Ronald Reagan was not a product of Hollywood. He made a couple of B movies to support the war movement, but he made his bones as a travelling spokesperson for GE. So he’s more a product of corporate America.

    He was elected governor of California, and was the first governor to sign no fault divorce into law. This because his first wife accused him of psychological abuse during their divorce. That alone warrants criticism.

    He was elected President, but I doubt he would have won re-election if he had not been shot in a failed assignation attempt. The country rallied around him, as is usual. He sort of lost it at the end of his term, due to age, which is to be expected.

    This is why neither Biden nor Trump should be considered. They’re too old!

    I favor new blood, someone from the younger generation. This is why I’ll be voting Libertarian.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  43. Nope, GG, not even close WRT Reagan.

    He opened up his career as a sports radio broadcaster in the Midwest. Before WWII he’d had several very good roles, none in a B movie, IIRC.

    My mom was a dancer and extra, and told me several times that you’d always see RR on a set reading a book between takes. He was twice elected president of the SAG (actor’s union). He was a staunch anti-Communist.

    He served in uniform in the war, and never enjoyed the career after as he’d had before.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  44. 42. Actually, DCSCA, Ronald Reagan was not a product of Hollywood.

    Except he was. Totally. Not just w/WB but his SAG experience as well. Nancy was well versed and rehearsed, too. The studio system taught them both how to fake sincerity well.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  45. @43 Reagan was a reserves guy whose only “real” military posting was a short stint at Fort Mason CA (Rofl). The rest of the time he served in a cinema production unit. He didn’t serve “in the war” he served during the war.

    Nic (896fdf)

  46. 45. He served where he was ordered to serve. Like many millions who have served in war time.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  47. …but they aren’t Republicans, and they’ve never been conservatives.

    They’re Republicans and conservatives, probably for longer than Trump, but their choice to vote for Biden is stupid.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  48. Speaking of ads, Trump’s “American Comeback” ad is so chock-filled with lies that the Enemy of the People issued a cease-and-desist letter.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  49. @45 – Reagan joined the US Army Reserve in 1936 and got in by wearing contact lenses (which were almost unknown at the time). He later transferred to the US Army Air Force. His bad eyesight disqualified him from Overseas service. So the Army AF gave him a desk job in SF, and then transferred him to making Training Films. Reagan rarely took a photo with his glasses on, but he was quite near-sighted.

    Carter never left the USA, Humphrey was 4-F, and Clinton was a draft dodger. Looking forward to your negative comments about each of them, but expect none.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  50. Which is worse? Nearsightedness or bone spurs? Reagan compensated for his disability so he could serve his country. He went where the Army sent him, and did what the Army told him (like Jesus and the centurion). That’s the definition of “soldier”.

    Same exact thing with Carter. The Navy turned him down for flat feet. Is that worse than bone spurs? So he spent months walking on beer bottles to create an instep curve, went back and asked for a new physical, and passed. Like Reagan and the centurion, the Navy told him “goeth there” and he “wenteth”, “doeth that” and he “doneth” it.

    What did the orange Fifth Avenue pervy poofter boy do?

    nk (1d9030)

  51. Coke bottles, not beer bottles, Billy was the one with the beer.

    nk (1d9030)

  52. Clinton was a draft dodger, as was Trump. Below is a photo of the podiatrist office that gave Trump the bone spurs excuse, and the podiatrist was conveniently a tenant in one of Trump’s dad’s buildings.
    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/12/21/us/politics/00trumpfeet5/merlin_148338396_eeaa56e9-58d4-4bad-935f-523cafe77ef6-jumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp
    I can’t speak to Humphrey, nor do I care to. Carter served on two US Navy submarines, the USS Pomphret and the USS Barracuda, both of which “left the USA” as part of their tours of duty.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  53. Caaaata graduated from Annapolis, and was training to be a nuclar propulsion engineering officer.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  54. @49 I did not realize we were having a discussion about any of them. Should there ever come a time when their (in some cases lack of) military service come into discussion, I will be glad to discuss it, however that was an irrelevant aside for this discussion.

    Were you ever in the military? If you were, I’m sure you realize the difference between saying that someone served in the war vs during it and how much of a problem it is to say that someone served in the war when they didn’t.

    Nic (896fdf)

  55. @47./@50 ROFLMAO

    Ronnie ‘n Nancy were products of Hollywood; where image over substance prevail$. Get over it–and lest you forget, gaze upon this syrupy load of “evil Hollywood lefties” piped out by the ‘fake media’ from Tinseltown top suckers across the land.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbSkhtMe-kU

    DCSCA (797bc0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0980 secs.