Mitt on a roll
About the only things Don Draper, a fictional character, and Mitt Romney have in common is that they are both handsome men.
How nuts is this latest strategy? Don Surber counts the ways:
Here is what is wrong with this personal attack (besides being a personal attack on a nice guy) Don Draper is a TV character. A popular TV character who, despite all his flaws, is liked by viewers. If they did not like him, people would watch something else. There are 500 channels today.
Those who know who Don Draper is like him, but most Americans don’t know who he is because most Americans don’t watch the show. Hollywood gives the show a bunch of awards so the people in the White House assume everyone is watching it. But that is not happening.
So Barack Obama’s strategy is to portray his opponent as someone whom most people don’t know and those who do know like.
And people do not watch “Mad Men” because the 1960s were not an interesting time to them. To try to portray Romney as a throwback to the 1950s (which for the mathematically challenged pre-date the setting for the show by a decade) is doomed to even worse failure. Most younger voters don’t know what the heck is meant by the 1950s and baby boomers liked the 1950s. Sure. What is not to like? We were kids. The 1950s were a time of Buffalo Bob and Howdy Doody, of Davey Crockett and coonskin caps, and of rock ‘n’ roll and Dick Clark. Give me the 1950s any day of the week. Cars had fins. Cereal had more sugar than cereal. You could smoke and not get cancer. It’s true. I saw it on TV.
So yes, turn back the clock to the 1950s and remind today’s core audiences of when they were kids and anything was possible.
Makes you wonder who “lacks life experience” and “imagination” to relate to most Americans, doesn’t it?