SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home "you Might Be A Little Overqualified"

THE PLANK MAY 9, 2007

"you Might Be A Little Overqualified"

BY TNR STAFF

Hats off to Bill Richardson's very clever new ad campaign:

[Thanks to reader JT]

Update: Commenter glowingspark complains that the ads may be fun but Richardson doesn't look presidential. I wondered about that myself. But I'd say driving home the calling card of his experience is probably worth that risk.

--Michael Crowley

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 27 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

27 comments

Those are really good.

- adamvaught

May 9, 2007 at 6:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What better way to stand out from the leading Democrats (Obama-Clinton-Edwards), whose shared weakness is inexperience (or perception thereof)? I consider myself on the Obama bandwagon, but this is a powerful answer from a supposedly lower tier candidate. Problem is, the entire lower tier (Biden, Richardson, and Dodd) is long on experience and short on charisma and money. I always wondered if first tier of Obama, Clinton, Edwards is running for President and the second tier, Richardson, Biden, Dodd is running for Vice President. (Obviously, the third tier, Kucinich and Gravel, is running for free publicity).

- stgla

May 9, 2007 at 6:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He doesn't look presidential. Yeah, the ads are entertaining but is the purpose of the ads to win awards or for Bill Richardson to become President?

- glowingspark

May 9, 2007 at 6:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It would be sad if you are right, but I think you may not be here. Looking presidential is more important than qualifications? Isn't that what gave us the Dubya Disaster? I think average Americans will get that message.

- stgla

May 9, 2007 at 7:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

They're brilliant ads. I'm guessing they'll get lots of free coverage on the cable news shows this week. Reminds me of Josh Lyman's Iowa ad strategy for Santos in season 6 of the West Wing.

- ralphnelle

May 9, 2007 at 7:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I worry that the "overqualified" part will be seen as a dig at Bush and therefore interpreted as negative-anti-Bush. Hopefully I am wrong and ralphnelle is right about the coverage! I think he would be a fine president.

- rishy

May 9, 2007 at 7:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The 1st tier should be running for VP and the 2nd tier for president.

- teplukhin

May 9, 2007 at 7:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm not sure if "negotiated with dictators" would sit well with the populace in a general election. Although that ceasefire in Darfur surely seems to have gone well. The second spot was just poorly written. I'll outline your achievements and then make a non sequitur. Clever indeed.

- rpm35

May 9, 2007 at 8:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The 1st tier should be running for VP and the 2nd tier for president." Many a true word spoken in jest. Or even half-seriously.

- ironyroad

May 9, 2007 at 8:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have a feeling Tep was completely serious...

- rishy

May 9, 2007 at 8:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

But can he save me money on my car insurance?

- gperez-

May 9, 2007 at 9:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I like the ads. Sure beats growling menacing attack ad man or better tomorrow inspirational woman.

- mookie

May 9, 2007 at 9:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

George HW Bush had an impressive resume too. Much better than, say, Abraham Lincoln's. I have nothing against Richardson, but his resume will mean a lot less to me than what he proposes to do. And I have no idea what that might be. Neil

- purcellneil

May 9, 2007 at 10:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Looking presidential" is a conceit they toy with along the Beltway. It's meaningless, invented to give the Beltway pundits and journalists, a class that has merged, a reason to shun potential cendidates whom they don't feel like allowing into their Kewl Kids Klub.

- dswift

May 9, 2007 at 11:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think the ads are fantastic on some deep existential level. Especially the first one deftly shine attention on the absurd predicament Richardson is in: that interviewer is a lovely allegorical embodiment of the DC punditocracy: aware of, but blithely contemptuous of, his amazing record of achievement, disrespectful of the man, basically uninterested, still wanting to know what makes him think he can be president. Richardson, brilliantly, calls attention to this but shows he can take it in stride and laugh about it. At the same time, they show him in a position of job-supplicant that will be familiar to and resonate with so many voters. If Richardson is half as smart as these ads, he'll make a great president.

- emigdio

May 10, 2007 at 2:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Since when did Bush look "presidential"? I thought people voted for him because they wanted to have a beer with him. On that scale, the ads are brilliant. And funny, too.

- nancyirving

May 10, 2007 at 6:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The "looks presidential" or "electability" canard. Reminds me of the salad days of the Kerry campaign.

- drdannyu

May 10, 2007 at 8:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I disagree with those who expressed admiration for these ads. Richardson is treated disrespectfully and puts up with it. He comes off as sort of a schlemele, almost like the dumpy Lou Costello in an Abbot-and-Costello routine, the opposite of Presidential. The words are nice, but the "music" is awful.

- JackR

May 10, 2007 at 8:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You would prefer if, say, he water-boarded the guy?

- drdannyu

May 10, 2007 at 9:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The candidate who looked and behaved less stereotypically "presidential" has taken office after each of the last four elections. Nor did Paul Wellstone's TV spots in 1990 and 1996 convey any of the sense of grave dignity one expects of a senator, but without those ads Rudy freakin Boschwitz would still be in the U.S. Senate. Personally, these spots left me with a very favorable impression of Richardson. And isn't that the point?

- rhubarbs

May 10, 2007 at 9:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sorry to mix up commercial campaigns. These are effective ads. Consider the intended audience (assuming these ads are to run in the immediate future): the only people paying attention to the campaign right now are party activists and other associated busy-bodies. These ads grab their attention, and distinguish Richardson from the crowd. If they get Bill a 2nd look, they work. I'm not supporting him but I liked the ads, and will pay attention to him to see what kind of follow up he delivers over the summer. "Looking presidential?" Save that for the general election. Besides, GWB has set that bar really, really low: his experience leaves me thinking that you need more talent to be elected an American Idol than an American President.

- kevmo

May 10, 2007 at 10:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know if any of us can really say if these ads will be effective, but I think that we can all agree to hope that they will be effective. I think that if these ads jump start Richardson's campaign, other candidates will start to be more inventive with their ads as well. People might actually learn meaningful things about the candidates by watching the ads.

- clifton

May 10, 2007 at 12:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

- teplukhin

May 10, 2007 at 2:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Re the ad's effectiveness, look at it this way: it's elicited more attention from TNR than anything else the man's campaign has done in recent months. Success in my book. Seriously, TNR, will we ever see a proper Lizza-style deep dive on Richardson? Why the delay? Is (peretsh the thought) Mr P blocking this?

- teplukhin

May 10, 2007 at 2:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Youtube might well be starting to change the way campaigns are run - or maybe "expand" the campaigns would be better said. This looks to me to be the beginning battle for the youtube crowd. I am sure there will be more "ads" to follow.

- jpollman

May 10, 2007 at 4:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think I agree that he looks unpresidential in these ads. There are ways and ways of doing so, of course. Clinton picking up a sax on Arsenio Hall wasn't particularly presidential, but it made him seem laid-back, easygoing, and cool. That turned into a big plus, especially when compared to the uptight, remote, watch-glancing-at incumbent or the high-strung, rattle-mouthed third party candidate. But sitting there and looking meek while some numb-nut in a blue shirt talks over you and condescends to you? That goes beyond "making you look like a regular guy" and becomes "making you look like a putz." The list of accomplishments and the humor value of the ad are significantly detracted from by the fact that Mr. Richardson just sits there while the guy talks over him. No conspiratorial smile, no attempt to win back face or hold onto his dignity, nothing. If you negotiated with dictators, how come you can't hold your own with some jumped-up prat? This is television -- show me, don't tell me. And who exactly is the blue-shirt guy supposed to be? A pause to reflect shows that, if the candidate with lots of experience traditionally doesn't do well in elections, that means the Richardson campaign is telling us that we, the voting public, are the blue-shirt guy. And the candidate is calling us fatuous and stupid for not taking his candidacy seriously -- which may be true, but isn't very persuasive. A fun pair of ads, but not a home run.

- austinexpat

May 10, 2007 at 5:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tep wrote, "Seriously, TNR, will we ever see a proper Lizza-style deep dive on Richardson?" Please no - dont you remember what happened with Warner, Vilsack and Bayh? As soon as TNR does a portrait special, the candidate is dead, over with, out of the race! If you wish Richardson well, pray TNR will skip him in its primary profiles..

- jobeek2

May 12, 2007 at 5:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close