Health Care Group Being Promoted By Elizabeth Edwards Goes Up With Ad
Here's an advance look at the new ad that Health Care for America Now -- the consortium of progressives, unions, and think tanks that's planning a $40 million ad campaign to call for universal health care -- is planning to unveil today at a noon press conference...
The group, which is being promoted by Elizabeth Edwards, is planning a hugely ambitious campaign that includes more ads like the above, organizers in 52 cities, Op eds in big broadsheets, and even an organizer placed in the districts of every Blue Dog Dem who might be resistant to supporting universal health care. The initial ad buy is $1.5 million.
HuffPo's Sam Stein has a good rundown of the group's plans.
Advertisement
I don't know about the ad. Shaking a Magic 8 ball really doesn't resonate with me.
July 8, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am not getting any sound with this ad.
July 8, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
No audio for me, either.
But I really think that one of the smartest moves Obama has made was to put Elizabeth Edwards in charge of this.
July 8, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
apologies for the audio. working on it
July 8, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
weird. audio working for us.
July 8, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who knows, Greg? I never saw a blogging program that didn't have bugs.
:)
July 8, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
For what little it is worth, the audio worked for me.
July 8, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have noticed recently that the sound control on a bunch of videos posted here have been turned down to the lowest point. When the video starts with no sound, I quickly have to click to engage and increase the audio, and only miss the first moment or so of the audio.
July 8, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Have to say that's so American of you to say something like that
July 8, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
A few brief responses:
1) Good for Mrs Edwards. I am somewhat baffled that health care, after having been such an issue in the primaries, has sort of dropped off the radar screen since April. No one seems to be talking about it any more, despite the fact that, near as I can tell, voters are still just as anxious about the state of our health care system now as they were in January when it was all the buzz.
2) I am especially tickled to read that they are placing organizers in the districts of the potentially unreliable. Well done. Hold their feet to the fire and make them co-operate if they cannot be trusted to do the right thing spontaneously.
3) I am not sure if this is significant or merely a coincidence, but I was struck by the fact that only one of the five people shown in that ad was a man. Do surveys show that women are more likely to vote based on this issue?
July 8, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know of any surveys, but I'm willing to bet women are more likely to vote on this -
July 8, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is good because it directly attacks the biggest single problem with our healthcare system: the insurance companies. The entire idea of having insurance companies involved must be discredited in order to make any progress on this issue.
July 8, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. This ad constitutes some of the prep work necessary to get the electorate past some of its irrational fear of "socialized medicine."
Funny how now one panics at the thought of a socialized highway system or a socialized education system but talk of socialized medicine gets so many folks scared witless.
July 8, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
You could add to that list the fire department and the police department as well. Certain things are more economic and make more sense when run by the government, including healthcare. Just look at all the other western democracies that are kicking our butt on trade. We can't compete effectively due to the healthcare issue. Get rid of it, by way of being government run, and gm, ford, and any other manufacturer will immediately be much more competitive. It would be a huge boon to the economy and the american people.
July 8, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
July 8, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is not a trivial distinction, practically or (especially) politically. Progressives would do well to learn better language-discipline on this.
July 8, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama just released a response ad to the RNC ad, hitting McCain HARD on his gas tax plan! it's at The Page.
July 8, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Dems put a lot of money into health care ads and what do the repubs do? They put a lot of money into gun ads.
Now I get it! If so much of a worker's paycheck didn't have to go towards their families healthcare they will have a lot more money to buy really cool guns.
It's not about the second admendment. The repubs have found a way for gun manufacturers to indirectly advertise their products on TV. heh!
July 8, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish they were promoting truly universal, single payer health care. It moves the debate in the right direction, but it doesn't go nearly far enough, and I fear it will give liberals a false sense of accomplishment, even while the insurance companies still control our health care system.
July 8, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Baby steps, baby steps. One step at a time. The ultimate goal is truly universal healthcare and eventually bye-bye insurance rip-off artists. Also, regulation of the insurance industry in the interim. Eventually it will wind up not being profitable for insurance companies so they will want to get out of the business anyway. Baby steps.
July 8, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing to remember is that a lot of countries that went from pure private insurance to universal healthcare did so in stages, and have different mixes. The recent PBS series on the healthcare systems in various industrialized countries was very informative on this. (Switzerland, which has private providers but mandatory services and costs, was quite an eye-opener.) If it's going to happen in this country, it's more likely to be a long-term transition than a big bang, and we have to be prepared to keep up the pressure.
July 8, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks to Health Care for America Now. It may be baby steps but I think the timing of this election year is very important. Health care affordability or unaffordable as most of us experience - is really an important issue and part of this devastating economic downturn. It is an issue being talked about in local and state elections.
The Ad would be more effective if it vocalizes the eight ball responses of "Doubtful", etc. All election related ads need to vocalize - don't depend on the viewer to always be viewing the ad on TV - some people are only "listening" to TV.
Our current multitasking society requires more vocalization in ads to get the message across.
July 8, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope they come up with more effective ads than this one. This is a crucial issue and needs to be slammed hard into public consciousness. I will look into donating to Health Care For America Now.
July 8, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the magic ball's a big mistake - it's such a distraction.
Maybe it works ok for people who are into ouija boards and other `fey` stuff but for realists it's a total turnoff.
It's triviliasing - surely, the last thing you need when you're trying to sell something so serious.
July 8, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm deeply disturbed that some folks I generally support have aligned themselves with this group. My examination of their webiste, the language it uses and some of the players involved tell me that the prime purpose here is to take real single payer off the table and to make sure the debate is confined to private insurance based solutions.
Yes, it may be necessary to get to single payer by steps and not all at once, but any step that more deeply entrenches the private insurance industry, giving it more power over the lives of more Americans is NOT a step in the right direction.
We should start the debate with single payer as the right solution, not by taking it off the table as "not politically feasible". Their website and program act as if the only debate is about how much to regulate the private insurance industry, and as if eliminating them altogether is not even an option to be talked about. They criticize the actions of the insurers, but won't take the step to the real answer.
If insurance is the problem, MORE insurance is NOT the solution.
July 8, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink