Tell me if you know this guy...
You're in a public place that has several TV's around set to the news. Let's say a gym or perhaps a bar/restaurant. Suddenly, the local TV weatherman comes on and announces that your cozy little northeastern community is about to get hit with a snowstorm that could gum up your AM commute.
You're sitting there, watching this, taking it all in quietly as you plan out tomorrow in your head to avoid any sort of problems when some complete stranger turns to you and says, "So much for global warming, huh?"
I don't know about you, but I just wanna slap that guy.
Look, not to sound like a bleeding-heart liberal, because I do realize that global warming is a problem. And whether you label him as a one-man propaganda-machine or a highly visible environmentalist, Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth has brought the topic of the environment to the forefront of the public consciousness for the first time since the early 1990's when we all got those recycling bins from our local waste collection organizations.
That said, it's pretty real. It's hard to argue science. Yet there are still some nimrods who think that 2-4" of white stuff is proof positive that it's not an issue.
My response to such statements is always, "Oh really? Where's your degree in meteorology, Al Roker?" Seriously, until I see some fuckin' credentials, I'm in no mind to hear Joe Barfly wax scientific on the environment and how it's just fine. Sing that song to the people down in New Orleans and see how far you get.
I love how we as humans make generic, blanket statements like this as if we really do have it all figured out. News flash: we don't.
Doesn't matter what your stance is politically (and I say this because I'm relatively certain that one guy who actually said this to me is a staunch conservative angling for digs at Al Gore and anyone else hoping for Blue State-approval), you need to know the facts in life. I don't mean to date myself (despite only being in my late 20's), but I remember when we used to get several feet of snow, not inches. So you can take your sorry attempts at sparking conversation and stuff 'em, Jimmy Gymrat.
Don't try and be a smart-ass or a know-it-all, because you come off sounding like a putz. I can think of no better way to describe you given these circumstances. One more outburst and I'll pour sugar into your SUV's gas tank and rip your Huckabee sticker off your bumper.
Motherfuckers.
Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow.
2/29/2008
2/15/2008
I’ve been following this election season with particular interest. After such a long period of disdain for the current administration by most of the American public, I’m really curious to see how the nation votes.
Specifically, I want to see if there are any trends. With such a large voter turnout, I think it's important to examine certain patterns. And lo and behold, I think I found one.
This past week, in checking CNN.com following Obama’s momentous eight-in-a-row sweep, I encountered an image of Hillary Clinton perched at a podium, speaking into a microphone and holding a pair of boxing gloves high in her hands. The absurd nature of this memorable photograph is amusing to me, as there is actually something rather frightening about that image. As I told a close friend, I would rather go toe-to-toe with Floyd Mayweather.
The headline was simple: “Clinton sharpens attacks on Obama.”
This made me come back to a notion I had last month as I watched and read about Senator Clinton’s ongoing assaults on Obama’s character. I noticed that whenever the media summarized the multiple debates between the two with the term “trading barbs,” to me it seemed more like Barack Obama being forced to go on the defensive. Now in lieu of her recent string of defeats in key states, Clinton proceeds with once again unloading on her opponent.
Yet somehow, part of me feels such tactics are what got her in this predicament to begin with.
Now I don’t intend to be an official spokesperson for my generation, but I can pretty much say with a clear conscience that when I listen to candidates speak, in any political race, I want to hear what they’re going to do. I want to know what Candidate X is going to do for me… I don’t want to hear them go on and on about how Candidate Y will not live up to the hype.
The message is clear: enough of this muckraking garbage. It’s passé and offensive to me as a voter. As a marketer, I have a few ingrained notions with regard to acknowledging competition. In one course I took, the instructor specifically said that outwardly claiming your competition is inferior results in a certain cognitive twitch in consumers. The thought: “Why are they even mentioning the competition if they’re superior?”
It comes across as somewhat underhanded and disingenuous to me, and one thing I’ve learned about my generation through various studies is that today’s youth are very savvy, and can see through a lack of integrity like glass.
Think about it… you’ve seen the SuperBowl ads the last few years, right? When’s the last time Pepsi mentioned Coke in their commercials? Or can you recall Bud Light taking a swipe at Coors? This doesn’t happen anymore, and with good reason. Consumers want to be told one thing, plain and simple: “Why you,” and not “Why not them.”
I really do believe the same thing holds true for voters. If you look at the trend, Obama has been fairly consistent in promoting himself and campaigning hard. And once Hillary eased up on the attacks, he was afforded the opportunity to further promote himself rather than defend himself. Now he’s earning massive points with key demographics that Clinton herself has dominated in past primaries.
Now, stuck in a do-or-die moment, Hilldog has broken out the gloves, apparently ready for war. I wonder who among her political advisors will be the first to tell her that her haymakers could be what led her down this road to begin with. If she keeps it up, she could be the one sporting the shiner.
Oh, it’s going to be very interesting to see where this one goes.
Goodnight, and have a pleasant tomorrow.
Specifically, I want to see if there are any trends. With such a large voter turnout, I think it's important to examine certain patterns. And lo and behold, I think I found one.
This past week, in checking CNN.com following Obama’s momentous eight-in-a-row sweep, I encountered an image of Hillary Clinton perched at a podium, speaking into a microphone and holding a pair of boxing gloves high in her hands. The absurd nature of this memorable photograph is amusing to me, as there is actually something rather frightening about that image. As I told a close friend, I would rather go toe-to-toe with Floyd Mayweather.
The headline was simple: “Clinton sharpens attacks on Obama.”
This made me come back to a notion I had last month as I watched and read about Senator Clinton’s ongoing assaults on Obama’s character. I noticed that whenever the media summarized the multiple debates between the two with the term “trading barbs,” to me it seemed more like Barack Obama being forced to go on the defensive. Now in lieu of her recent string of defeats in key states, Clinton proceeds with once again unloading on her opponent.
Yet somehow, part of me feels such tactics are what got her in this predicament to begin with.
Now I don’t intend to be an official spokesperson for my generation, but I can pretty much say with a clear conscience that when I listen to candidates speak, in any political race, I want to hear what they’re going to do. I want to know what Candidate X is going to do for me… I don’t want to hear them go on and on about how Candidate Y will not live up to the hype.
The message is clear: enough of this muckraking garbage. It’s passé and offensive to me as a voter. As a marketer, I have a few ingrained notions with regard to acknowledging competition. In one course I took, the instructor specifically said that outwardly claiming your competition is inferior results in a certain cognitive twitch in consumers. The thought: “Why are they even mentioning the competition if they’re superior?”
It comes across as somewhat underhanded and disingenuous to me, and one thing I’ve learned about my generation through various studies is that today’s youth are very savvy, and can see through a lack of integrity like glass.
Think about it… you’ve seen the SuperBowl ads the last few years, right? When’s the last time Pepsi mentioned Coke in their commercials? Or can you recall Bud Light taking a swipe at Coors? This doesn’t happen anymore, and with good reason. Consumers want to be told one thing, plain and simple: “Why you,” and not “Why not them.”
I really do believe the same thing holds true for voters. If you look at the trend, Obama has been fairly consistent in promoting himself and campaigning hard. And once Hillary eased up on the attacks, he was afforded the opportunity to further promote himself rather than defend himself. Now he’s earning massive points with key demographics that Clinton herself has dominated in past primaries.
Now, stuck in a do-or-die moment, Hilldog has broken out the gloves, apparently ready for war. I wonder who among her political advisors will be the first to tell her that her haymakers could be what led her down this road to begin with. If she keeps it up, she could be the one sporting the shiner.
Oh, it’s going to be very interesting to see where this one goes.
Goodnight, and have a pleasant tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)