• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Kamala Harris does not understand the point of the "3AM call" ...

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
27,003
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
The point of Hillary's "3AM" ad was to suggest that she was ready to take emergencies that would require calling and waking up the president at 3AM in the morning - perhaps a terrorist attack or a military attack on an allied country. It was also to suggest her opponent, one Barack Obama, was not. Nobody is calling the East Wing at 3AM to chat about tax or health care policy.

Here's Kamala's ad:


Here's Hillary's original.



A lot more dramatic, for sure. Also, there is a point about invoking "3AM". In Kamala's ad there is no real purpose to it, and in fact it seems quite random and pointless.
 
I would rather have Kamala Harris or Hillary Clinton there to take that 3AM call than the Orange Idiot. For that matter, I would rather have Sponge Bob Squarepants take the call rather then Trump.
 
I would rather have Kamala Harris or Hillary Clinton there to take that 3AM call than the Orange Idiot. For that matter, I would rather have Sponge Bob Squarepants take the call rather then Trump.

That's not the point - of course you would.

The point is that neither KH nor her team evidently understood the point of the 3AM call ad.
 
The point of Hillary's "3AM" ad was to suggest that she was ready to take emergencies that would require calling and waking up the president at 3AM in the morning - perhaps a terrorist attack or a military attack on an allied country. It was also to suggest her opponent, one Barack Obama, was not. Nobody is calling the East Wing at 3AM to chat about tax or health care policy.

Here's Kamala's ad:


Here's Hillary's original.



A lot more dramatic, for sure. Also, there is a point about invoking "3AM". In Kamala's ad there is no real purpose to it, and in fact it seems quite random and pointless.
I suppose it is if one ignores the actual content of the ad.
 
The ad would be fine by itself in a vacuum, she's not referring to a phone call at 3am, instead it's people's worries at that hour. But it is like she never heard of the Clinton ad. Can't tell if she is trying to evoke that ad awkwardly or is just totally ignorant of it. Either way, it fails. They should have just picked a different hour.
 
I would rather have Sponge Bob Squarepants take the call rather then Trump.

Patrick Star would be hundreds of times better than Trump. Even a mean, off-his-meds Patrick.
Props and a hearty "Good job!" to Derec for finding something that Kamala (President Kammi? :eek: ) appears not to understand.

If there's a "so what" about it, you should post that too Derec.
 
I suppose it is if one ignores the actual content of the ad.
What am I ignoring? What part of the "actual content" has any logical connection to 3am? The whole reference to it seems a forced reference to Hillary's 2008 ad, without really understanding what it was about except vaguely "competence".
 
I suppose it is if one ignores the actual content of the ad.
What am I ignoring? What part of the "actual content" has any logical connection to 3am? The whole reference to it seems a forced reference to Hillary's 2008 ad, without really understanding what it was about except vaguely "competence".
It seems like a forced reference to you. People do stay up late worrying about the varying issues Harris mentioned in her ad.

Is it a coincidence they picked 3am or is it an attempt to portray Harris as more caring than HLC? I don't know and I don't think it matters much one way or the other.
 
People do stay up late worrying about the varying issues Harris mentioned in her ad.
People stay until late at night worrying about tax policy?
People may stay up late doing taxes or figuring out ways to evade taxes or worrying about their tax liability - all of which are the consequence of tax policy.

You do realize that ads - political or commercial - are not necessarily made to be taken literally.
 
Watched her lengthy interview with Chuck Todd on Sunday. Not impressed. Mostly very earnest but insubstantial platitudes. Scores one of the higher words spoken-to-content ratios.
 
Back
Top Bottom