De como Obama apareceu na miña vida

Foi durante un paseo polo centro de Boston, creo que na nosa primeira semana na cidade, cando un repartidor de publicidade lle deu a armin un anuncio do mitin que ía dar Obama no Boston Common. A ver se colga o anuncio no seu blog e podo enlazalo. Xa o colgou.

Barack Obama en Boston. Naquel momento (fai un ano), aínda non era o icono internacional de hoxe, e aínda tiña que vencer a Hillary para converterse no candidato demócrata á White House. Pero era un mitin nos EE.UU. e non podíamos faltar. No centro de Boston ao caer a noite. Alí nos presentamos os tres a curiosear e ver/sentir o espectáculo electoral norteamericano en primeira persona.
Desde que nos baixamos do metro (en Boylston ou en Park St) , xa se sentía o "ambientillo", camisetas co lema Obama08, pancartas, souvenirs coa foto do candidato (porqué non comprei unha chapa xigante?), seguratas, música, protestas, xente, riadas de xente...O Boston Common é un parque enorme, o recinto habilitado para o mitin estaba completo e a xente sentábase nas ladeiras altas para poder ver o candidato. Empezou o espectáculo co himno estadounidense cantado en directo, que polo volume da megafonía creo que se puido escoitar en media cidade (como todo o mitin). Bandeira xigante, personaxes demócratas locais que foron preparando ó público para a entrada do candidato e a aparición de Obama en escena (que vimos desde bastante lonxe como para poder fixarnos nos detalles).¿Estaríamos a un centenar de metros do vindeiro presidente estadounidense?

The ad Wars

Máis de 286 millóns de dólares levan xa os candidatos norteamericanos gastados en spots de tv. Así polo menos o dí o New York Times. Este xornal ten a disposición dos seus lectores unha sección que vai actualizando cos spots da campaña e os sitios onde estos se emiten.Sobre o mapa dos estados norteamericanos sinalan onde se emiten os spots por áreas de mercado e o diñeiro invertido en cada área. As sinais vermellas son de John McCain e as azuis de Barack Obama. Ademais tamén recollen os principais temas destes spots, encabezados en ambos casos polos impostos.
Existen diferencias importantes nas estratexias seguidas polos dous equipos. Os republicanos por exemplo, emitiron as súas mensaxes televisivas en todos os estados (a excepción posiblemente de Wyoming). Os demócratas ainda que invertiron moito máis presuposto en tv, foron moito máis selectivos cos estados, así Utah, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Dakota do Sur, Nebraska, Arkansas e Mississippi non foron consideraron estratéxicos (de momento).
Florida, un dos estados máis disputados, centrou parte dos esforzos demócratas. A outra gran batalla está en Pensilvania e Ohio, onde ambos partidos se esforzan. Ningún republicano conseguiu ser presidente sen gañar en Ohio, e ademais os pronósticos din que poden gañar tamén Pensilvania.
O estado no que leva vencendo ó longo de todo o século XX e no que vai de XXI o partido que chegaría á White House, Missouri, está case igualado en cantidade de mensaxes emitidas.
Igualados tamén Colorado e Novo Mexico, outros estados determinantes nas eleccións.

Carteles propagandísticos

De nuevo publicidad política, de nuevo Estados Unidos. Pero esta vez son carteles, menudos carteles…

Artistas y diseñadores contribuyen a recaudar fondos para la campaña de Obama, con carteles numerados y firmados que se venden por 200$.

De Justin Bua

Del estudio Morning Breath

De Sam Flores

De Shepard Fairey

¿Por qué en España no se hacen este tipo de cosas?
¿Alguien las compraría?

Obama, sin ser aún presidente, es todo un icono de masas. Un póster así sería un buen complemento para las paredes de los apartamentos de amantes del diseño (que son muchos y con poder adquisitivo). Así, no me extraña que el mes pasado Obama recaudara 46 millones de euros...
En este caso, el diseño es muy bueno, pero no me imagino un póster de ZP o RJ compartiendo apartamento con los de Audrey o Metrópolis. Pero por si alguien se anima, una pista para empezar.

Select quotes

27 de setembro do 2004. Spot Campaña Bush – Kerry. Transcrición.

Bush: I'm George W. Bush and I approve this message.
Kerry: It was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision I supported him.
Kerry: I don't believe the President took us to war as he should have.
Kerry: The winning of the war was brilliant.
Kerry: It's the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Kerry: I have always said we may yet even find weapons of mass destruction.
Kerry: I actually did vote for the 87 billion dollars before I voted against it.
Loc: How can John Kerry protect us . . .when he doesn't even know where he stands?

Declaracións de Kerry no seu contexto orixinal:

1. No primeiro debate no que se enfrentaron os dous candidatos, o 3 de maio do 2003.

Question: And Senator Kerry, the first question goes to you. On March 19th, President Bush ordered General Tommy Franks to execute the invasion of Iraq. Was that the right decision at the right time?
Kerry: I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

2. Nunha entrevista nun programa de TV en xaneiro do 2004.

Question: Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it's been fought, along with General Clark, along with Howard Dean and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?
Kerry: I am… Yes, in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely. Do I think this president violated his promises to America? Yes, I do… Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was, and we should have done it right.

3. No mesmo programa de TV en maio do 2004.

Question: All this terrorism. If you were president, how would you stop
it?
Kerry: Well, it's going to take some time to stop it, but we have an enormous amount of cooperation to build one other countries. I think the administration is not done enough of the hard work of diplomacy, reaching out to nations, building the kind of support network. I think they clearly have dropped the ball with respect to the first month in the after… winning the war. That winning of the war was brilliant and superb, and we all applaud our troops for doing what they did, but you've got to have the capacity to provide law and order on the streets and to provide the fundamentally services, and I believe American troops will be safer and America will pay less money if we have a broader coalition involved in that, including the United Nations.

4. En setembro do 2004 nun discurso.

Kerry: You've got about 500 troops here, 500 troops there, and it's American
troops that are 90 percent of the combat casualties, and it's American taxpayers
that are paying 90 percent of the cost of the war. . . It's the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

5. Para Fox News.

Question: But isn't it, in a realistic political sense going to be a much harder case to make to voters when you have that extraordinary mug shot of Saddam
Hussein...looking like he's been dragged into a police line-up?
Kerry: Absolutely not, because I voted to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. I knew we had to hold him accountable. There's never been a doubt about that. But I also know that if we had done this with a sufficient number of troops, if we had done this in a globalized way, if we had brought more people to the table, we might have caught Saddam Hussein sooner. We might have had less loss of life. We would be in a stronger position today with respect to what we're doing. Look, again, I repeat, I have always said we may yet even find weapons of mass destruction. I don't know the answer to that. We will still have to do the job of rebuilding Iraq and resolving the problem between Shias and Sunnis and Kurds. There are still difficult steps ahead of us. The question that Americans want to know is, what is the best way to proceed? Not what is the most lonely and single-track ideological way to proceed. I believe the best way to proceed is to bring other countries to the table, get some of our troops out of the target, begin to share the burden.

6. A última das declaracións foi a que deu pé á realización do spot, que veu a reforzar o argumento de que Kerry era un político flip-flop que cambiaba o seu argumentario dependendo das circunstancias. Esta declaración foi un intento de explicar outra polémica desta campaña.

Máis info en FactCheck.org

Stand By Your Ad

Os políticos que se presentan ás eleccións (polo menos ás presidenciais) nos EEUU están obrigados por lei a identificarse como responsables das mensaxes que emiten. Esta lei aprobouse, entre outras razóns, para rebaixar o ton negativo das campañas e os ataques entre candidatos.
Estes son algúns exemplos que serviron para xustificar a mensaxe negativa que as precedía:

Lieberman: "I approve this message because leadership means doing what's right."
Dean: "I approved this ad because I think it's time for Democrats to be Democrats again."
Kerry: "I approve this message because it's time to do what's right for America"
Gephardt: "I'm Dick Gephardt, and I approve this message because it's time we did what's right."
Clark: "I approve this ad because deep down we are all patriots."
Edwards: "I approve this message because together, you and I can change America and make it work for all of us."

Hai outras nas que os asesores de comunicación empregaron a creatividade para evitar que as mensaxes de aprobación lles quitaran efectividade ós mensaxes negativos:

Kucinich: "Do I approve this commercial? You bet."