Here is an ad from 1960. Senator John F. Kennedy was running for President against Vice President Richard M. Nixon. In this ad, the Kennedy team decided to use President Dwight Eisenhower’s own words against Nixon. This is a classic “Them on Them” type of ad. Do you think a “Them on Them” ad is an effective ad to use in a campaign?
Politics Matters 
“Them on Them” ad can be effective if people are not aware of politics and do not follow what the candidates say during speeches or press conferences..etc. On the other hand a people may not listen to the “Them on Them” ads because they want to hear what the views from the candidates are and the important decisions and changes they will make to benefit society. I think it depends on what is being said on the ads if its a sensitive or disturbing subject then the ads will not work but if its a minor ordeal and people seem to believe it and change their votes then it may work.
The “Them on Them” ad is an okay route to go against a candidate. It is the most straight forward approach in an election, and to me I would have to say that there needs to be more than this approach. There should be facts, statistics, and other evidence that supports the candidates claim. Overall, this election is a quite interesting one in history, and it’s just to show that even politics can be understood from a kid’s point of view. In saying that, one should always include politics in their daily decisions.
The “them on them” ads i believe work on certain people it makes some second guess what they thought off a person. Harms the person to because usually when someone messes up they don’t it to reappear or talked about. Some people only see tv adds and if they see bad things about the person they’re about to go vote for they debate about it.
I definitely think the “them on them” strategy is a good strategy, particularly if the “them” doing the talking is well-regarded, and well-respected. It could mean disaster for the “them” running for office. It also allows the candidate that endorses the ad to sling mud, while keeping his hands clean. Like, “What? I haven’t said a word. All I did was tell you what such-n-such said about them.” I think it’s a good strategy. It’s a strategy I would probably use if I was a candidate.
It can be an effective ad to use. I think that the people should be able to listen to each candidate and what they have to say. If a president in office is making bad choices and not benefiting society or the people, the people will know about it. They will see bad changes or no changes at all and know that they will not vote for the current president to run again. If it is not obvious to the people, then a “them on them” type of ad would be useful to let people know about the bad things in politics.
I belive that a “them on them” ad is a good way to go because what’s a better way to prove a point about some them then to us there own word aginst them. That way they can’t say they didn’t say that and that your putting words into there mouth.
I think the “them on them” strategy is effective only if the “them” is using creditable and realivent information. I think to put this in a public ad is defiantly and straight forward way to try and get a large one up on the opponent. For people who aren’t that deep into politics may see an ad like this and most definitely be easy pursaded.
“Them on Them” is a very effective strategy to use if political figures are running against another. With “Them on Them” the candidates can use past political figures to help Americans understand what that candidate stands for and what their opponent is for that the popular “Them on Them” figure was against when he was in office. This sort of strategy was used during the 2012 presidential elections when Mitt Romney used a hologram of famed 1980’s post president Ronald Reagan to remind Romney’s supporters of what he stood for, and when Obama used post president Bill Clinton for his supporters.
this is the most effective ad because nobodies words could possibly be stronger than the words of your own party. he can point at his opponent and say, “look, even his friends think this about him”. you can only say so much about people. eventually, your message will hit a plateau and youll need more people to agree with you.
I think them on them ads could be viewed as effective or ineffective depending on who you ask or how you look at it. It’s hard to continue liking a candidate if you hear them being slammed and torn down in the media. These ads are definitely more personal that factual. For this reason, I think they do work for a lot of who don’t know much about politics. These people make up a good portion of the population so in that sense it’s effective because it’s influence their opinion and sways their vote. At the same time, it’s ineffective because there’s no real information being given in the ad. Rather than catering to a lack of political knowledge ads could aim to educate the public and help them to vote on issues and relevant information that really matters.
To me a them on them ad will work for some reasons, it makes everyone second guess the candidate, but it has to be used at the right time to work. IT is really hard to choose a candidate because they both are always getting slammed and it leave the voters clueless.