How Prop. 23 Still Can Win

How Prop. 23 Still Can Win

John Seiler:

Prop. 23 is going to lose in a week. That’s because the Yes on 23 campaign is not going to do what I’m going to tell them right now, right here. Then I’ll explain it below.

They need to personalize the campaign — against Arnold. Here’s the ad, which they can use free. I’m offering it to save California. Somebody with the right computer skills should be able to patch it together in a couple of hours. Or have it done in India for $200 overnight. Here it is:

Video of Gov. Arnold signing AB 32 into law. Voiceover: “When Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32 into law in 2006, unemployment in California was just 4.9%.” Ominous soundtrack. “Now it’s 12.4%.”

An animated chart on the screen shows an arrow rising, from 4.9 to 12.4%. “Arnold’s AB 32 more than doubled California unemployment. In four years under Arnold’s AB 32, it killed 1 million jobs. Arnold killed 1 million jobs.”

Picture of people in unemployment lines.

“Stop Arnold. Vote Yes on Prop. 23. It will stop Arnold. Vote Yes on Prop. 23, it will cancel Arnold’s AB 32 and restore your job, your family’s jobs, and 1 million jobs in California.”

Show more pictures of unemployment lines. Then have testimonies from Californians who have lost their jobs:

Latino: “Arnold killed my job. Prop. 23 would bring it back.”

Black: “Arnold killed my job. Prop. 23 would bring it back.”

Anglo: “Arnold killed my job. Prop. 23 would bring it back.”

Asian: “Arnold killed my job. Prop. 23 would bring it back.”

Voiceover: “On November 2, save your job. Vote Yes on Prop. 23.”

Why it would work

Here’s why such an ad would work: It personalizes the issue. Arnold is unpopular. He signed AB 32 and is identified with it. So use it.

Check out the Yes on 23 site: Boring. Worse, it’s abstract. Headline:



And there’s some kind of flash thing that’s not well done, with flipping pictures. Like a campaign site from 2000.

Now, check out the anti-23 site: What a great, descriptive URL. Headline: “No on 23: STOP the Texas’ Oil Companies’ Scheme to Repeal Clean Energy and Air Pollution Standards.”

See how they personalized it? Most Californians look on Texans like they’re the crooked J.R. Ewing from the TV show “Dallas” (family picture at right).

Next, the site has a YouTube of a lady pediatrician saying something like (I didn’t watch it all), “Prop. 23 would choke all of California’s kids to death.” Again, personalization: A nice lady doctor and your kids — vs. those dirty Texas Oil companies!

The pro-23 side needs to perform a jiu-jitsu here and demonize somebody. Look how this YouTube attacking the  anti-23 James Cameron is so effective. As I write, it already has been watched 150,850 times, even though he’s just a rich director most people don’t know.  That’s because it’s an effective, personal attack on a hypocrite. I first saw it when one of my “Friends” uploaded it to Facebook.

Imagine how effective the anti-Arnold ad, as I wrote it above, would be. It would go viral.

Such an ad is Prop. 23’s only hope.

(The Cameron YouTube is below:)

Oct. 26, 2010

No comments

Write a comment
  1. Eric in Santa Rosa
    Eric in Santa Rosa 27 October, 2010, 13:44

    I couldn’t agree with you more! This would be an outstanding Yes on 23 campaign strategy, and it’s too bad there are only 6 days left until the election as I write this. Should 23 fail, we would need to vigorously employ this strategy in 2012, linking AB 32 directly to Arnold and a by-then *very* unpopular Gov. Jerry Brown so that AB 32 can be abolished. Permanently. I shudder to think what our unemployment rate will be in two years if and when Prop 23 doesn’t pass.

    Reply this comment
  2. Eric in Santa Rosa
    Eric in Santa Rosa 27 October, 2010, 13:51

    I also fear tremendous animosity from Texans towards Californians if and when they are called to bail us out of the fiscal mess caused by Sacramento, that could easily had been avoided if Tom McClintock’s ideas on responsible taxation and spending had been heeded. Why is it necessary for the anti-23 campaign to point out that the oil companies are *Texas* companies? To gin up support for their side, I guess it’s effective, but a sad commentary on the anti-Texas bigotry many Californians seem to have.

    Reply this comment
  3. stevefromsacto
    stevefromsacto 1 November, 2010, 16:34

    Eric, since we’re “doomed”, why don’t you lead the charge and move to Texas? Since you want to destroy our environment anyway, at least you won’t have to breathe our bad air anymore.

    Reply this comment
  4. Tylerle13
    Tylerle13 1 November, 2010, 18:37

    Haha Steveo you just gave Mary Nichols the vapors! She would love if all of us lower & middle class workers (AKA Polluters) would just get the hell out of California. Then all of you enlightened group thinkers can prance around Naked in your own personal Nature Preserve & enjoy the gift of prop 19.

    So are you going to continue to march lock step and follow CARB as they regulate CA until we become the First Officially Bankrupt State in the USA, or will you just change the subject and point to how horrible Nevada is because they allow gambling & assault weapons?

    Reply this comment
  5. stevefromsacto
    stevefromsacto 2 November, 2010, 09:17

    Tylerliar, you have the nerve to classify yourself as “lower & middle class” but you support Tesero, Vallero, Chevron, etc. Why don’t you just join Eric and move to Texas–a.k.a. Paradise on the Rio Grande.

    Reply this comment
  6. Aldren
    Aldren 11 August, 2012, 03:31

    Although this is a smear campaign I do beevile in the truth and the lies portrayed on both sides is despicable. The Fact is Global Climate Change is real and the science can actually measure the drastic fluctuations that are occurring today and model future disasters that will occur. So ignore the political banter, and realize if we do not change our behavior now your children will suffer because of your disbelief in proven fact. By denying that Global Climate Change does not exist you are feeding into the Large Corporation trying to protect there trustfunds and off shore bank accounts. I beevile both sides of this argument is wrong for representing interest groups but the fact is this proposition will kill jobs and someone mentioned China. AB 32 takes these jobs away from China and gives them to American manufacturers. STOP the injustice and give us more clean energy jobs.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Do the math: 55% taxes loom for $300K-plus earners in California

Nov. 25, 2012 By Chris Reed Matt Miller, a quirky and interesting writer-thinker for a lefty think tank (the Center

State Property Sale Off, Again

Katy Grimes: The highly questionable sale of 11 state-owned properties hit another snag on Monday after being given the go-ahead

Hollywood-Style Rail Pander

Katy Grimes: In the OMG category, I caught a 30 second commercial tonight on a local Sacramento television channel that