3 different approaches

If students use meaningless words to lengthen their papers, and one can truly believe that this has found its way to the presidential candidate promo, then Bernie Sander's video is the Fluff of a lifetime. He shows nothing important and says nothing important. All he shows is the "average American Joe" working and cheering for him. He believes that a country song and a video with hay and a barn in it will make him a brother to all the hard-working, country folk. I would find more rhetorical weaknesses in his speech, expect that he did not really say anything. He seemed to believe that just a video of him smiling and people cheering would convince all of America to follow him blindly.
Trump, on the other hand, dealt with a couple main issues. Instead of simply showing his face (like Bernie Sanders) he shows relevant videos. His commentator aptly used the phrase "until we find out..." including the audience by creating a sense of unity.
If Trump's was a blunt, forthright video, Obama's was the opposite. It was a "feel good" video, using "happy" words such as opportunity, equality, etc. He used alliteration by repeating "Yes, we can." He heightened people's sense of identity by listening to the song by singing "We won't change."

Politicians...

So honestly watching the Obama one, after 30 seconds, I skipped ahead a minute to see if anything changed. It didn't. I skipped to the end, same thing, only with more "passion." With Bernie, he was attempting to make supporting him look fun. That doesn't seem to be realistic. With Trump, he is blatantly promising stuff he cannot do. Build a wall and just make Mexico pay for it? What if they say no? He'll probably just cut their heads off. Just like Isis apparently. Bernie appeals to an emotional aspect I guess. Trump just likes making controversy, because if the spotlight is on you, its not on your opponents. Strategy. And Obama tried to remix his speech, throwing in Scarlett Johansson in there. Nice try.

Rhetorical politics

All of these political ads have pros and cons to them. The Bernie Sanders' ad was good in a video effect way. It highlighted the good parts of America and why people come here. But it didn't show any of Sanders' politics so while it was a good video, it was not an effective ad. Trump's video was straight and to the point, not shying away from any of his controversial ideas. However, I did feel that there was almost an element of fear tactic to it, bordering on terrifying the audience into choosing Trump. There was also a lot of negative campaigning, such as shaming the other candidates, which can turn voters off of his cause. Obama's ad had a very strong inspiration message in it throughout, which people tend to gravitate towards. The input of the celebrities also seemed to portray society's approval of his message. But the video was long, which could turn people off, and, in hindsight, whether he actually accomplished all of those things that he said he would is debatable. Making a great political ad isn't easy, but, has these videos have shown, you don't always have to in order to win audiences over.

Do what you gotta do

All three of these politicians used rhetoric to try to gain votes.  I dont have a problem with this as it is their job and it has become more and more acceptable to bend the truth in a presidential campaign.  However it was entertaining to see how each video matched the politicians personality.  Bernie sanders seems like a nice enough guy, lacking good political insight.  His ad was focused on him being nice and views of his supporters.  He said nothing throughout the ad. Donald Trump is aggressive in personality and has some radical political view.  His ad was an explanation on how to deal with one of the most controversial topics, ISIS, is an extremely controversial way.  Obama's ad was appealing to the musical nature of society.  Many people take well to music today. All three used the techniques they thought would most influence america.

Political Ads

Bernie Sanders tried to play a song about America and have pictures and videos of normal people on farms and people cheering for him, but it really had no point to it. I guess he tried to appeal to the emotions of Americans, but it just kind of feel short. Trump's was the more serious of the three. He talked about what he wanted to do in his presidency, which I kinda liked, even though he tried to appeal to the fear of the people to get his point across. While I like his focus on what he wants to do, like Camden said, we do not know if he will actually accomplish these things. Obama's was nice at first but after two minutes I was done. He used famous people to get people to vote for him and music and singing which was cool, but for 4 minutes just made it stupid. I couldn't pay attention to what he was saying hardly at all either. I only heard "Yes we can" the whole time, but I can see why some people would vote for him after that ad because he is advertising unifying America and change. 

Yes We Can!

Yes, we can plunge the country deeper into national debt, we can raise the unemployment rate, we can kill babies, we can socialise health care, we can get nuked by ISIS and Russia, we can become a part of the Chinese Commonwealth... I could go on, but the real thing here is that these three ads were unique in their own respective way. First of all I would like to congratulate the Democrats for winning the Pathos award for the day! Burnie's ad didn't really say anything about his socialist stances; however, it did have a super catchy background song with clips of average Americans doing average American things like carrying farm animals, doing science, smoking legal weed, going to college for free, and getting stuck at a permanent middle class due to the lowered glass ceiling. It pains me to say this, but Obama's ad would've been perfect save for the fact that the singing wasn't exactly aligned with his speech. Artistic, yes... annoying, yes... did I get a headache? yes. As I was furiously downing Tylenol to aid my imploding skull, I heard a good bit about the phrase "yes, we can" and my initial question was,"can what?" But don't worry, because they answered me. "Yes, we can change!" Awesome, I was just thinking about how I needed some spare change! You've got my vote, Obama! ROLL OUT THE CHANGE!!! But, guys, in all seriousness, we need to get serious, because it's time for serious talk... seriously. That's about the impression I got when I watched Trump's ad which featured gigantic walls, disgruntled illegals, ISIS, muslims, another holocaust, reality TV, and a surprising lack of toupees. Hey, but don't take my word for it, watch it yourself.

I think any further explanation about my opinion of Trump's campaign ad can be deduced through an understanding of dry sarcasm. 

Yay for Presidential Elections

I liked Obama's add. I liked the song. It was very interesting to me, and I enjoyed how they had different people sing his speech. Very intriguing although it was super long.
When I saw Donald Trump's add I was just like "Really?????" He only focussed on immigration and the problems with that. I know that situation can frustrate many people(@Gabbi Estrada) so I personally wouldn't have chosen that as my topic. But hey, you do you, man.
Bernie Sanders' was kind of weird. I did not see any specific purpose. All I saw was people walking around with him shaking their hands and other people dancing in front of a political poster.... Oh well.
All in all i found them entertaining, just weird. Sanders and Trump focussed on different people groups whereas Obama just straight up went for everyone.