Republicans are Stock Photo Models

The Republican Party is trying to make itself all hip and modern with an ad campaign and a Twitter hashtag, #IAmARepublican, that focused on how Republicans are not just old, stuffy white guys. No, they’re black and they have tattoos and they drive Priuses and stuff. There’s just one small problem: All of the images they used are stock photos, not actual Republicans. The Daily Banter caught the first one:

Lots of ads use stock photos, of course, but if you are trying to court a group of people you have been aggressively ignoring as a matter of political strategy, you might want to think about finding a real person to be in your ad. Also, if you’re going to include a slide that says, in the plural, “Republicans are black,” then you should probably make at least one other person in the rest of your ad black. Alas, that sole honor fell to this attractive, young, apparently Republican woman:

The woman in question:

gop-ad

But she’s not only a Republican, she’s apparently also a Georgia lawyer, a fashion designer and a consumer of eyeglasses, among other ad campaigns this same image has been used in. Talking Points Memo then tracked down a bunch of the other pictures in the ad and they’re all stock photos. Oops.

"Also, a pardon essentially removes the ability to take the Fifth (it's impossible to self-incriminate ..."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"In the other side of the screen, it looked so easy."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"That... doesn't make me feel any better. Of course the state of the nation is ..."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"Also, you’re replying on the wrong thread on the wrong blog, Boris. Our conversation is ..."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • raven

    LOL.

    The Mormon church did the same thing a year or so ago.

    They tried to show that all Mormons weren’t vacant eyed northern Europeans.

    Photos of Mormons who were nonwhite, surfers, riding motorcycles. It turned out that many or most of their examples…weren’t Mormons.

    “This is what a black Mormon would look like if there were any black Mormons.”

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    No, they’re black and they have tattoos and they drive Priuses and stuff.

    To be fair, they could be. I mean, they aren’t, and won’t, and can’t, but they could be.

  • daved

    To be fair, real Republicans don’t show up on film or have reflections in mirrors.

  • Mr Ed

    Republicans are people is just marketing hype. Being a Republican has about as much chance of making you human as smoking a Marlboro does of making you a cowboy. Republican Puffery over substance.

    The real problem is that the power brokers in the party thought a marketing campaign would be better than cogent policies.

  • Chiroptera

    So, what that ad campaign is trying to tell us is that there are Republicans hidden among us?

  • blf

    So, what that ad campaign is trying to tell us is that there are Republicans hidden among us?

    (Looks under the bed.) Nope. None here.

    However, anyone want some dustmastodons?

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Mr Ed “The real problem is that the power brokers in the party thought a marketing campaign would be better than cogent policies.”

    To be fair, when the cogent policies boil down to “Vote for us so that we can save the country from you people”, a marketing campaign is pretty much all they have left.

    Honestly, I’m a little surprised they didn’t just dig through their backfile for a picture.

  • moarscienceplz

    I notice they didn’t say Republicans are gay.

    Although, I had a neighbor who was a gay Republican. And a racist, and a sexist.

  • D. C. Sessions

    if you are trying to court a group of people you have been aggressively ignoring as a matter of political strategy

    Most of the demographics that this ad campaign are courting (young, female, Latino, African-American, etc.) would have been much better off if the Republicans had ignored them.

  • dingojack

    I can’t understand why they didn’t go straight to the Dianne Arbus collection for stock photgraphs of Republicans.

    Dingo

  • Randomfactor

    Did they get her photo out of one of Mitt’s binders full of women?

  • Alverant

    I know this is a strawman argument, but what would happen if the same sort of commercial were done but replaced “Republican” with “Atheist” or “Muslim”?

  • Reginald Selkirk

    This reminds me of io9’s review of the new Left Behind movie

    From the comments:

    BuryMeInEngland: Am I right in saying this only features white middle class Americans?

    Charlie Jane Anders: Nope. The cast is scrupulously, painstakingly diverse. Mostly so we can see every possible stereotype respond to the Rapture.

  • http://cheapsignals.blogspot.com Gretchen

    I know this is a strawman argument, but what would happen if the same sort of commercial were done but replaced “Republican” with “Atheist” or “Muslim”?

    It’s not an argument at all; it’s a question. A question whose point I can’t seem to grasp.

    A commercial about how atheists or Muslims are black, female, Latino, etc. done with stock photos? I imagine pretty much the same thing– people would point and laugh. As an atheist, if it was an atheist commercial I’d cringe.

    However, they probably wouldn’t point and laugh as much, and there’s a good reason for that. Namely that atheists and Muslims are minorities in America, minorities typically despised by Republicans. So the idea of Republicans falsely representing minorities as being Republican is a much more absurd notion than that of atheist and Muslims falsely representing the same thing.

    And as much as I’d shudder to consider an atheist commercial claiming that there are Republican atheists (almost certainly David Silverman would have something to do with it), I’m pretty sure it would not use stock photos to make its point.

  • Chiroptera

    Alverant, #12: I know this is a strawman argument, but what would happen if the same sort of commercial were done but replaced “Republican” with “Atheist” or “Muslim”?

    It would be mocked and ridiculed. By atheists and probably Muslims, no less, so pretty much the same as in this case.

  • http://festeringscabofrealityblogspot.com fifthdentist

    When your political party has to actually tell people that its members are humans — “really, we are” — and your candidates for U.S. Senate have to run commercials assuring the electorate they they are not witches and didn’t mean to say out loud that some rapes are legitimate and that you really didn’t mean that your opponent should be Second Amendmented to death if you lost the election, maybe it’s time to realize they you’re just a bunch of assholes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    To fair, the GOP did look ask black republican women for photos, but neither of them had any usable headshots before they had to put the ad into the can.

  • congenital cynic

    So, Republicans are dishonest? I’m shocked. Completely shocked.

    What a bunch of shameless wankers.

  • congenital cynic

    @3

    Okay, that’s insulting to vampires.

  • Reginald Selkirk

    fifthdentst #16: When your political party has to actually tell people that its members are humans — “really, we are” …

    Which raises the point that it is Republican policies which generally fail to recognise and support the humanity of others. Their current platform is selfishness enshrined. Maybe they should put together a series of ads for their base, reminding them that non-Republicans are people too, and worthy of consideration.

  • http://drx.typepad.com Dr X

    @Dingo:

    I can’t understand why they didn’t go straight to the Dianne Arbus collection for stock photgraphs of Republicans

    hmmm… There’s a couple of ways that can be taken, but I’ll go with irony.

  • lorn

    Easy enough to tell if she is a Republican. You check under her left arm for her serial number and blood type. All Republicans have that … or am I thinking of some other group?

  • Artor
  • Michael Heath

    The other day someone at Kos rightly ridiculed a GOP ad. The ad said (paraphrased): I’m a Republican who reads the New York Times.

    But the photo had the actor reading the WSJ instead, where the editor tried to hide that by blurring most of the paper. But not enough to reveal what was clearly the WSJ to those of us who’ve read the paper.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Michael Heath, they had to do that. The WSJ is a newspaper for The People, while the NYT is so…so…so…liberal that a Real American would break out in The Big City Cooties* simply touching it. Plus, Real Americans have no insurance, which is Obama’s fault, somehow.

     

    Also, they didn’t blur the WSJ. It’s always like that. You don’t need to read when you’ve already reached a conclusion.

     

    * Also, band name.

  • raven

    I thought we had managed to get rid of all the Pod People.

    This is what happens when Hollywood changes the endings for dramatic effect.

  • steve84

    When you have to convince other people that you are human, maybe you should acknowledge that there is a deeper problem.

  • donalbain
  • John Horstman

    Did they run out of photos of Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas, or did they finally figure out that making men who have sexually assaulted women prominent faces for your party is a bad idea when you’re trying to counter the “War on Women” meme?

  • scienceavenger

    They forgot “Republicans are lazy” and “Republicans don’t understand ‘the google'”