The situation with Hillary Clinton is really odd. Everyone knows she’s guilty of lots of wrongdoing, but somehow it doesn’t seem to matter to her supporters. It’s definitely a new one on me to see a popular candidate everyone already knows has no ethics whatsoever and just breaks whatever rules and laws she wants, but is so powerful everybody is too scared to do anything much about it (either that, or else the whole rest of the government is just as corrupt as she is. It’s too nauseating to even think about it!). It’s such a yucky and cynical situation, I think the only real way to deal with it in political attack ads is to go silly and funny with it, and to be playful with it just to lighten the mood, otherwise it’s just too depressing to contemplate. I mean, it’s not like they’d have to convince anyone of anything: everyone already knows what kind of person Hillary is, let’s be honest. (Why can’t we just have an honest, competent woman with impeccable character and a never-say-die attitude to be the first woman president, someone like Kirsten Gillibrand?)
So in this joke/proposed Republican Hillary political attack ad, we’d see a picture of Hillary Clinton with lots of headlines about her scandals animated over her picture for the first segment, and the announcer could say: “Hillary Clinton has scandals galore. When it comes to dishonesty and corruption, she really takes the cake. In fact, she stole the cake, and then she tried to claim there never was a cake at all. But then news stories proved there was a cake, so she said that yes there was a cake, but someone else stole it. But after more news pieces make her story fall apart, Hillary’s political operatives leak a story to the press that there was, in fact, a cake, and that Hillary did, in fact, steal it; but Hillary only stole it for the millions of hardworking Americans who cannot afford a cake of their own: surely someone must stick up for these cakeless Americans, right? And, yes, they admit, for a back of the newspaper addendum to the story that nobody will ever see or read, that Hillary did not share the cake she stole with any of the millions of Americans who want but cannot afford cake: she ate it all herself. But she only did so to feel what it must be like for struggling Americans finally to get to have a cake of their own (and eat it too). In fact, she said, of struggling Americans: ‘Let them eat cake!’ (But then she ate it.)”
And during the announcer’s monologue, we’d see different pictures of Hillary Clinton that look appropriate for what we’re hearing, like Hillary smiling in a shifty way, Hillary pointing at someone, Hillary eating something (with a mouthful of food), etc., mixed in with pictures of a cake, the cake plate with the cake gone but leaving telltale signs of it having been there, like a ring of icing, crumbs, etc. And so we’d have an animation based on a series of still photographs ordered in such a way as to tell the story visually.
(BTW: Sorry to Hillary supporters out there; this has nothing to do with policy or ideology or partisanship for me. I’d like to be able to like her too, but she’s quite simply way too corrupt, almost cartoonishly so. Voting for Hillary really is a lot like voting for Richard Nixon after all of his malfeasance was revealed: it just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to trust the most important job in the world with almost unlimited powers to a selfish sociopath…again. {Sadly we’ve done it a couple of times already; we should learn from that mistake and not repeat it.} Doesn’t someone honest and competent like Kirsten Gillibrand offer the same policy positives as Hillary without any of the negatives and without the copious baggage? I don’t understand why she’s not in the race by popular demand.)
