ned lamont - the video

Ned Lamont’s campaign just released a video, produced and directed by Robert Greenwald, the guy who made Outfoxed and other documentaries about Wal-Mart and the lies that led up to the Iraq invasion. You can watch the video here—it’s available in three different formats, so one of them at least should work on your system.

Now, if you’re unfamiliar with Ned Lamont and what he stands for, be patient—he finally shows up a little more than halfway through the video. And be sure to view it on a system where you can crank up your speakers as the volume is way too low for comfort on the web (in each of the formats). I had to listen to it on Stanley’s computer because he’s got a good sound system set up on his, where the harmon kardon speakers on my Toshiba laptop suck—and even on Stanley’s system, I had trouble hearing it (note to the Lamont media folks: some of us are hard of hearing. And we vote.)

I am a solid, active, supporter of Ned Lamont. I even changed my voter registration from unaffiliated to Democrat so I can vote for him in August (yes, I actually remembered to do this!) I’ve done some volunteer work for his campaign (such as putting together and hosting Connecticut Choice Voice), and with Stanley, getting the voter history records from Westport, and we will probably do even more as the need arises. His bumper sticker is on our car. So my “review” of the video is meant to be constructive.

My comments: The video takes way, way too long to introduce Ned. It’s way, way too negative. (As is most of the Lamont campaign literature I’ve seen.) Ned’s website is so much better as presenting him and his positions on the issues that the campaign would be better off just sending people to the home page than spending the money on slick mailings and videos that waste too much space Joe-bashing. What’s the closing shot on the video? A picture of Joe and Bushie. It’s clever and funny, but only to those already in the say-no-to-Joe camp. What it does is evoke sympathy for Liebermouth. Bash, bash, bash, and not nearly enough about Ned.

The montages are so choppy that I was never sure what issue was being discussed—why not a straightforward sequence of Issue, Liebermouth’s stand (non-solution), Ned’s solution. You know, problem-status quo-solution. Make it crystal clear why Ned is the better choice. Ned is charismatic, articulate, and easy on the ears (vs. Joe’s whine)—the video should start with Ned and end with Ned. The campaign literature should follow the same format: Ned has a better way. It’s all too much about Joe sucks and that gets old really fast (no matter how much Joe sucks)—I want to support a candidate, not vote against an incumbent. And I want the candidate I’m supporting to be better than the incumbent, not buried by the mud. A little Joe-bashing is fine, but not something to base an entire campaign on.

When watching the video, I wanted to know more about what Ned’s program is in the Bridgeport high school, and more about his views on paying for healthcare, and to know more about how he thinks we should get ourselves out of Iraq and what he thinks shoud be done about enery—I already know what Joe’s positions are. I’m just worried that the over-focus on Bad Joe will evoke more more people to vote for him out of sympathy than belief in him. I think Greenwald’s video should be remade into a video about Ned and the issues and presented without the cute intercutting that makes it confusing—the issues are certainly compelling enough. The campaign literature should be focused on Ned and his proposed solutions more than DINO Joe.

And that’s my two-cent’s worth. Stop feeding my depression about the way things are now—give me some hope.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 05/15/06 at 02:47 PM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

<< Back to main