you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Sittingonarainbow 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Those aren't particularly well done commercials, but I do think if they tried harder using actual examples like the boys winning all the girls track and field sprint events in Connecticut or just showing actual footage of the Rachel McKinnons, Hannah Mounceys, and Fallon Foxes of the sports world (or headlines about Fox breaking a woman's skull and Mouncey breaking the woman's leg, even the findings of the Rugby league) with a voiceover that Biden/generic democratic candidate doesn't care about women's sports and safety would really catch people's attention. If I wasn't peaked, the pictures of Mouncey next to female players would have been enough for me, and I would think twice before supporting a candidate that supported the destruction of women's sports.

[–]BEB[S] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not positive, but the three girls in their sports ad might be the three extremely brave Connecticut girls who filed a lawsuit about TIMs being allowed to compete in girls' athletics. If not, they look a lot like the real girls.

But I agree those ads could have been much more effective. The thing is even conservative groups have to walk a fine line lest they be accused of being "transphobic" even if they're just showing real TIMs and quoting real statistics about TIMs.

Protecting TIMs supersedes material facts. What other group gets that kind of special treatment?

[–]missdaisycan 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Drop them an email saying so? AmericanPrinciplesProject.org Looks like a religious pac, but if they have the $$ for ads, can't hurt to clue them in as to peaking material...