Smoking, Campaigning, Polling, and Fundraising

In regards to the 2012 Presidential Election, the issues at hand remind me of the typical sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll issues from the 50's, 60's and 70's. We are now in the 21st Century and these are the questions we ask in a radical new millennium:

Does America Need a Smoke Break?:

With over a million and a half views Herman Cain's "Now is the time for action!" ad has more than twice as many "dislikes" as it does "likes" on YouTube. The number of people who have disliked this ad is sending out a powerful message about the ad as it appears on the the second largest search engine in the world after Google. Personally, I thought the first part of the ad was fine and communicated a good message, but what's up with Mark Block smoking a cigarette at the end and why does Herman Cain's face look so weird at the end of the ad? We are living in a time where there is a focus on being fit and smoking is being outlawed in public places almost everywhere in the U.S. The message to unite America is good but what do they want America to do once it's united, get together and smoke a cigarette? Whether or not people agree with the message, it is quite brilliant in many ways. The strategy to go viral on YouTube while communicating that everyone has their own right of choice all while stirring things up equals mass publicity with an "In your face I don't care about your thinking your better than somebody else attitude." This controversial ad is dumb to some and smart to others, but the huge thing about it is that people are continuing to talk about it and even the ones that don't like it have watched it multiple times aiding in its viral status. Cain, who once claimed to being ignored by the media isn't being ignored anymore. He's a business man and he's shaking things up. I guess you could say, "Herman Cain's ad is smokin'."

Late night comedic talk shows ate this ad up thus giving Cain's campaign even more free publicity. When I watched the ad I thought about are current president being a smoker when he was voted into office. I'm just glad that you can't suffer from second-hand smoke through a YouTube video or television commercial. If I were to have produced this ad myself I think I would have place a no smoking sign at the end of it to add even more controversy. There are people that have smoke coming out of their ears over this ad and they may be the very ones that need to realize that America needs a figurative smoke break. The office of the president of the United States is an office that marries the American people. A lot of people are looking for a mate that is a good boy with a little bad boy in them. It looks like Herman Cain has a little rebel in him, and while I don't agree with a pro-smoking message; I do think we need a revolution of change, and revolutions are led by those that go against the grain. I'm not supporting Herman Cain, I'm just acknowledging his ability to lead a possible revolt to change what needs to be changed. I've always been who I am without caring what others think about me and I respect other who do the same. Nevertheless, Herman Cain's face at the end of the ad is still a bit creepy to me, and before fully analyzing the ad I was confused about its overall message. 

Does the early bird (candidate) get the worm when it comes to political polling?

If you haven't read the book Game Change covering the behind the scenes actions of the 2008 presidential election, read it. I feel that this book confirms that the early bird doesn't always get the worm. In regards to a presidential election what I'm saying is that what the early polls report don't always dictate the final outcome. Sometimes however, polls do accurately predict the future. The game can change at anytime. Many times, more often than not, the results of the polls pick the winner ahead of time. Sometimes the early polls lack the insight of reality failing to see the possible game change or hidden strategy of a candidate. While I think the early numbers do matter I also believe they can be deceptive when it comes to true outcomes. The early bird candidate in the polls will not always be the one that ultimately gets the worm. The polls are a guide that can sometimes lead beliefs of expected victories in the wrong direction. They are still a good statistical indicator of what is probable or what will most likely happen, but the true lead and majority vote can change at any time. Early numbers may matter and they may not matter. How much early numbers in the polls matter depends on how much change a candidate is able to bring to the race despite what is forging against them. 

Do big or media endorsements put the "sign" in significance for a political campaign?

Having media endorsements seem pretty important to presidential candidates but they don't always mean a win for them. It is interesting however how in recent years the Democratic party has been favored in media endorsements and they are on top in Washington. Many studies have also shown that candidates with a lot of media favor don't succeed in their efforts to hold office. More favor in the media is of course better than less. Hilary Clinton was thrilled in the book Game Change when she received her media endorsement. I don't think there is any rhyme or reason to this, nor do i think media endorsements put the "sign" in significance for a political campaign, but I do think these endorsements are important and can play a vital role. 

Are political donation guidelines a fair space for candidates to color their campaign within?

It is important to have guidelines when it comes to making political donations and raising campaign funds. Are the guidelines fair? For the most part I think they are. There are restrictions on amounts that can be given by any one individual and when giving significant amounts names do have to be disclosed. There are however some loopholes and ways around identity disclosure in some circumstances. Also, it takes a whole lot of people with shallow pockets to keep up with the few with deep pockets. When reading the article from the New York Times "From $25 to $10,000,000: A Guide to Political Donations" I was reminded of the line from the movie Aladdin, "You've heard of the golden rule haven't you? He who has the gold makes the rules." I guess I would say the guidelines are fair, but the truth is that the one with the most money can do more, say more, and influence more and I'm not sure if that is fair. 

Deneene Says...Choose not to smoke if you can while retaining your power of choice, don't believe the hype even if it's the first thing you see, know for yourself those who big companies or the media endorse, and make sure the donations that support the candidate you support are fair and not some political carnival act. 

I'll speak with you again soon with more political news.