John Edwards, a year ago, was riding high. The New Yorker ran a cover story on him, labeling him the “next Bill Clinton” (in a good way). He was a fresh face, from the south, with an exceptional ability to connect with voters.
That was then. Now he’s struggling in the polls and fading fast.
There’s no way to know for sure, but if Howard Dean wasn’t in this race, I believe Edwards would be a top-tier candidate. Instead, Dean has ridden a wave of excitement and successful fundraising to the top, while Edwards has slowly but surely drifted back to the middle of the pack.
This is not to say that Edwards hasn’t been working hard as a candidate. For the better part of 2003, Edwards has been doing what conventional wisdom suggested was the right move — raise a ton of money. And Edwards has done just that, raising more this year than anyone except Kerry.
But for every dollar Edwards was raising, Dean was picking up a supporter. Edwards was generating a flush bank account, Dean was generating excitement at the grassroots.
Unfortunately for Edwards, he’s run out of time. If he doesn’t make a move now, he’ll never catch up when all the candidates start campaigning full time in advance of the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary.
With this in mind, Edwards has made his first ad buys of the season, hitting New Hampshire’s and Iowa’s airwaves with three television commercials that he hopes will give his campaign a needed boost.
It would be really difficult to describe these ads in sufficient detail, but if you’re interested, you can watch them online at Edwards’ site. If campaign advertising is as interesting to you as it is to me, you’ll definitely want to take a look.
Why? Because these ads are excellent.
Here we have a textbook example of how to do campaign television advertisements. Edwards hired David Axelrod, a Chicago-based media consultant, one of the best in the business at shaping advertising messages. He signed on the Edwards campaign a few months ago and if these ads are effective in giving the campaign a bump in the polls, Axelrod will definitely deserve a raise.
If you watch the ads, notice how incredibly comfortable Edwards seems. He’s not reading cue cards or going through the motions; he’s connecting in a very Clinton-like way.
Not to pick on Dean, but also take a look at how not to do a campaign ad. Go check out this ad that Dean began airing in Iowa about six weeks ago (scroll down to the June 25 post). Dean is stiff and awkward, reading a message that seems unnatural. It’s the exact opposite of the way Dean communicates on the stump. Giving a speech before 1,000 people, Dean is confident and energetic. In the ad, he’s stilted and uncomfortable. His media buy would have been more effective just showing him give a regular speech.
Naturally, none of this has anything to do with substance or policy. Edwards having great commercials doesn’t mean he’d be a great president. No one should buy a car based on which car company produces the best ads, and no one should choose a president that way either.
Edwards can have the best ads in campaign history but if he doesn’t inspire confidence from voters, the commercials are meaningless. Likewise, Dean’s ads may be awful, but if he continues to excite the party, he’ll get the nomination despite the TV spots.
This post, I suppose, is really just about the mechanics of the campaigns. More voters will see a TV commercial than see the candidates give a speech. That’s what makes an efffective message in a family’s living room so important. Go watch Edwards’ ads and you’ll see what I mean.