That ad he ran while running for gov - him on the horse - was one of the best I've seen.  

Bill Richardson has been pretty clearly in the centrist Dem camp for a while.  I think these ads are perfectly consistent with how Richardson views himself and what he'd like to present to voters.

That's one thing I don't get about the netroots sometimes...it seems like all a candidate has to do is chime in on the hot button of the day (i.e Richardson's completely out of Iraq comments) and suddenly whatever that politician has done in the past is moot.  I mean, these ads are who Richardson is.  Why is that a surprise?  If you're looking for the Dem "fighter" candidate, I'm pretty sure that John Edwards is auditioning.

Agree with most of the analysis. I would agree with both negative points. The lack of identification as a Democrat is glaring - he is running in the Democratic primary after all. I'm not as completely taken with the second ad, as the 'wall' is an inherent symbol of bipartisanship more than it is about Iraq.

I assume the wall one is for New Hampshire. In New England, I think that would play pretty well, especially as he is essentially introducing himself in that very anti-war region.

I think the bio one is very effective.

The guy is a centrist Democrat, so he is almost certainly listening to people who have been wrong for the last 8 years.

Especially since the whole no "residual forces" thing was just a sound bite.  I heard him on Ed Schultz explaining that he plans on withdrawing from Iraq, but keeping forces in the region for counter terrorism measures and protecting our interest in the region.  His "total withdrawal" thing is so disingenuous to me.  Oh look the troops are out of Iraq and happy and safe.

I am sooo tired of Democrats being ashamed to be Democrats and spewing "bi-partisanship" ad nauseum.  Whereas the Republicans scream their party name and the term, "conservative" from the rooftops.

Yes, it is ONLY language.  But it matters.  Words matter in negotiations.  The more we talk like this, the more we unilaterally disarm and start the game already in the hole.

Edwards Voters.

I promise you Edwards will not have any ads promising tax cuts or reaching to the other side.

As Bill Moyers said,  "having two versions of a side and meeting in the middle doesn't always get you to the truth"

Overall, there are two problems with both of these ads: over-emphasis on bi-partisanship, and a complete lack of self-identification as a Democrat.

Yeah, that's how I see Obama, too.

I think the Governor is losing weight.

Do Richardson, Hillary, and Obama know that the General comes after the Primary and that to participate in the General you have to win the Primary?

I knew there'd be an opening on the left for Edwards. I didn't know it would be so enormous.

Actually the fact he's running in the Democratic primary is pretty good reason for the lack of identification. It's self evident, there are no candidates from other parties running for the democratic nominination.

The ad is aimed completely at democrats party members, they know the party. they like the party, they work for the party. It's hard to do party building in that crowd because the party for them is compareable with aa castle with turrets and 10 feet thick walls with proud blue banners.

I do concede as soon as republicans start running the be the Democratic nominee then it's time to concider mentioning it. And seeing the polling numbers that may not be far off. but untill then running for a post with in a party tends to be self-indentifying

As for the not pushing the "Democratic brand" point Chris raises, we should remember that he is introducing himself to the national voting public with these ads, and IMO it is better to approach it the way you'd like to be seen in the long run through the general election and subsequent governance.

I partially agree with Bower's analysis of selling the brand. I think that would work well especially for him. If I am the media guy, this is the message I am going for. "Democrats did it" as Mario Cuomo said in his 1984 DNC speech. However, I would expand to "Democrats did it, I have done it, and we can do it together to restore America." This, I think would resonate because he can prove he has done things unlike the other candidates.

Is it a great idea to introduce yourself to Americans by showing pictures of you schmoozing with Saddam Hussein?

Reaching across walls to a Party that has backed everything Bush had done, that gets in teh way of passing the damn minimum wage?  Blah.  Defeat Republicans!  Elect a large majority and then intimidate them with another election (just as was done to use in 2002)!

Thats a good idea, but I think you guys are missing something. A large part of his bipartisanship talk is about not talking up or down Democrats and the fact that Democrats do not have to run a negative campaign to win (unless first provoked of course).

So does he even need to announce he's a Democrat? I agree it's necessary in the general, but especially in Iowa it's a waste of five seconds because it offers no new information and does not distinguish him from his opponents.

Here's for bringing adwatch back!

It must seem boring for you to belabor these points, but repeating the critical message is the only way to get the message across.

stood up for their party, stood up for their ideals, stood up for liberalism/progressivism, kept attacking Republicans, kept using "conservative" in a derogatory sense - then GOP would not exist today. There would/should be no room for a semi-fascist party in the US.

Richardson sure looked great in the Wall ad.  I guess there is hope for middle aged fat guys.  He sure has slimmed down!

Sorry, but I found the review off-base.

"It oddly never has Bill Richardson himself speaking in it. Do voice over commercials still work?"

Of course they do.  Would you have had Richardson say all of this in his own voice?  That would come off as more than a little egotistical.  I suppose there are other ways of telling a person's life story, but this pretty much delivered the information and told me some things I never knew about him (am I the only one surprised by four Nobel Peace Prize nominations?).  I also thought it sounded impressive and the voice lent gravitas.

"What I don't like about the ad is that it does not blame Republicans for Iraq"

Ok, this is my biggest problem with your review.  Frankly, as a Democrat, I'm a little tired of the blame game.  Also, give the voters some credit -- Richardson makes it clear with the last line ("being stubborn isn't a foreign policy") that he's talking about Bush without belaboring it.  He also doesn't sound like he's whining about Republicans when he says it or is pointing fingers.  Voters have passed judgment on the Republicans and now it's time to look forward.  Just because the ad doesn't stoop down to a level that you would prefer doesn't mean that it doesn't articulate a vision and an approach to solving problems.  I would prefer a candidate who articulates a vision, not goes around blaming Republicans for the mess we're in.  A lot of Democrats voted for this mess, too, including two of the leading candidates.

"There are two problems with both of these ads: over-emphasis on bi-partisanship, and a complete lack of self-identification as a Democrat."

This is another misfire in your review.  After six years of complete gridlock (eight if you count the Monica years), many Iowans and New Hampshire voters, like many Americans, want Washington to finally get something done.  In this ad, Richardson sounds like someone who can win the general election, and Iowans have been known to gravitate to the candidate they think can win it all (witness their selection of John Kerry in 2004), and New Hampshire voters gravitate to the independent candidate.  To argue that Iowans and New Hampshire voters want partisanship just because they elected Democrats is off-base.  They wanted change, so they voted for Democrats.  But that doesn't mean that they want to replace Republican my-way-or-the-highway politics with Democratic my-way-or-the-highway politics.  I think they, like most voters, are seeking a middle ground of reasonableness and maturity, and that's what I got out of these ads.

Also, you criticize Richardson for not wearing an "I'm a Democrat" button on his lapel.  I think Democratic voters are smart enough to figure out who the Democrats are that are running.  I'm also, frankly, a little wary of anyone who feels they must blare their party ID to me before they think I will listen to them.  Of course he's a Democrat.  I'd rather he not waste time in a 30 second ad telling me he's a Democrat when I already know that.  I'd rather hear how he's going to fix this country.  And thinking I need to see the word "Democrat" on the screen to know he's a Democrat is a little insulting.

I'm not totally convinced by Richardson yet, but I learned a lot about him from these ads and thought they set a pretty good bar for the others to meet.  He sounds smart and well-prepared to be president.  I also think he knows what he's talking about when it comes to diplomacy.  That would be refreshing for a change.

I have to say these ads struck me as very ho hum, very quiet and unassuming.  Granted, I suspect this was on purpose. These were probably designed to be quiet, simple introductions.  (Maybe it is a little bit too early to be speaking the truth with strength and conviction.  Or, is it?  Something tells me the shadow of Dean's experience in Iowa/2004 looms over some of these decisions.)

In the first ad...is 80,000 new jobs created a lot for New Mexico?   Sixth best in the country?  Which means what? Total number?  Per capita? Richardson is number six? Huh? I say take that sixth place thing out.

Would I be remiss in noting that "The Wall" ad must have been shot almost six months ago?  The forest atmosphere surrounding the governor just shouts late October - some leaves on the ground still with some color, some reaping or cutting done of grass/alfalfa in the background.  His campaign clearly figured that they would be able to use the basic message.  They just couldn't count on Dubya's team's being stupid enough to try to build a wall through downtown Baghdad to highlight Richardson's message thrust.  Life always best fiction.