Sunday, September 20, 2009

New Liberal Ad


Tomm said...

Same type of ad.

I don't know if it will work. It is bland and it is also saying the same thing that all political parties have been spouting as environmental mother's milk.

green economy, green economy, green economy, green economy,

He would be better off finding out how the Harper government is going to approach Copenhagen, find some warts and wrinkles he (or David Suzuki) disagrees with and pound that back at us. At least the ad then creates a conversation.

kirbycairo said...

Oh yea . . . this whole bland approach is going to work. . . . NOT!

Lizt. said...

Michael needs to talk to his ad is too much like the others,.. where one would turn away, thinking, the same old.....

Steve V said...

Apparently, there are new ads coming, with a different feel. As far as introductory ads, I don't get the reaction. But, then again so far it comes from a Con sympathizer and a NDP sympathizer, so really is it a statement on anything? I find that bland.

√Čric said...

If Ignatieff isn't actually spitting on an image of Stephen Harper (and his family), I don't like it.

Weak! Boring!

I'm going to vote for the guy who uses YouTube videos in his ads instead.

sjw said...

I can't stand this country lane backdrop shtick. Why portray this 'citizen of the world' on some cottage lane miles from nowhere? I don't get it and it certainly doesn't make me feel inclined to vote for it.

Oemissions said...

Lets import Van Jones as Leader of the Liberal Party.

Tof KW said...

Frankly, I like these ads. Contrasts quite well against what Mr Angry is spewing over the airwaves. One sounds like a Prime Minister and asks if we, as a nation, want to do better. The other sounds like a frantic, scared little man who pulls coalition boogiemen out of the closet in order to protect his job.

There is plenty of time for the Grits to get more aggressive during an actual campaign, but right now they are trying to show there is a huge difference between Harper and Ignatieff. Not hard to do either. Going negative right now would make the Libs look no different than the Reformatories.

For the record, Dalton McGuinty used these same ads to introduce himself while Ernie Eves spewed vitriol not unlike Harper. My mind is a bit hazy, but how did the 2003 Ontario election turn out again?

Steve V said...

They are what they are, not sure why we need to project an entire ad strategy onto the FIRST INNING. If the next round has the same vibe, I'll think differently, but this is a standard introductory theme, pleasant and easy.

Tomm said...

With respect to the "Just Visiting" ads.

It dawned on me the other day that there is a side to them I had not considered. If Ignatieff leaves the Liberal leadership and then leaves the country, the ads will have a powerful righteous punch that will reverberate for some time.

It will justify them.

Just as the 2006 Liberal kitten eater ads would have been made righteous if Harper had mimmicked those frightening visions with his actions.

JimmE said...

Re your Just visiting comments; this makes about as much sense as me telling you if I had a billion dollars, I'd be a billionaire.
BTW, it was a Tory staffer six years ago who called Premier McGuinty an "Evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet". (Tories never change do they?) Did you mean the 2006 Soldiers in the street adds, or are you just mixing your metaphors?
Since we're on the subject of Tory ad buys, how 'bout the great timing of the Socialist/Separatist Coalition ads what?

RuralSandi said...

Oh the Con trolls are so tax conscious, yet I don't see any of them complaigning about the taxpayer funded Con site with Mike Duffy.

Either you believe your BS or you don't.

Tomm said...


I'm not from Ontario, didn't know about the McGuinty ads. I was referring to the 6 ads that included the soldiers in the street ad.

With respect to the socialist-separatist coalition ads, they came out right after Ignatieff made his Sudbury speech and both he and Bob Rae claimed not to have been part of any coalition. The ads were essentially election ads (Ignatieff was promising his best efforts to cause an election), and to refute the ridiculous notion that the Liberal's were never part of the absurd coaltion.

With respect to Ignatieff leaving the country. My money is on his lasting one election and throwing in the towel. He seems to be a man of little patience and no time for fools (i.e. the Liberal caucus).

Tomm said...


Haven't seen the Mike Duffy piece except for the bit on Question Period.

Seems fine. You think that the taxpayer shouldn't be paying for it?

My understanding is that he is soliciting... IDEAS not money.

The Government of Canada wants to know what Canadian's think.

Perhaps Canadian's also shouldn't be paying for any more Colin Kenny junkets to Afghanistan since he has decided it is a "Vietnam".

Jerry Prager said...

Surely these ads are aimed at all the old voters, people who like banality and safe, secure leaders: they're Iggy's blue sweater campaign, designed to make seniors see the difference between the Liberal leader and the guy who seems to be always angry. Since they represent the majority of voters, who the hell cares whether any of us are bored by them or not ? I find pablum boring, but it's not being marketed to me.

JimBobby said...

Re the "Soldier in our streets" ads, there was more than a grain of truth in them , as it turned out:

"Reserve units across Canada are being trained in securing perimeters in case of an emergency. The Canadian military has embarked on a wide-ranging plan to turn its reserve soldiers into focused units trained and equipped to respond to a nightmarish array of domestic threats, including terrorist "dirty bomb" attacks, biological agent containment, Arctic catastrophes and natural disasters.

The creation of seven units within each region of the country -- including unusual all-terrain vehicle (ATV) squadrons and perimeter security teams to cordon areas of potential devastation -- prepares reserve soldiers for operations on the "domestic front" while freeing regular force soldiers to concentrate on foreign battlefields."

Original story in Nat. Post no longer available. Copied story:


WRT this new ad, I'm not so sure MI can sell himself as a greenie -- or whether it's even a good idea to try given what happened to genuine greenie Dion. Iggy has come out in favour of the tar sands and the expansion of nuclear energy.

He may well be seeing the light vis-s-vis the false dichotomy of economy vs. environment but his environmental credentials are weak. 30 seconds is a short time but, even so, I think he could have done a better job of explaining what green jobs are... assuming he knows.


Steve V said...


I heard a couple pundits say this ad was a mistake, because Liberals should avoid the green references now. I hope that we don't shy away here, because if you want to provide a future economic vision, tying the environment to new growth is a no brainer. Especially in Ontario, where we need to revitalize the manufacturing sector, it's really a message of hope.