If you want to teach people about any issue or any candidate, TV really does the trick.

What this says about our culture and where it's headed is another story. But candidates are kind of stuck with this right now.

I would suspect these ads would be a mix of an introduction and persuasion piece. Yes, overexposure may be a risk, but the research shows that this is the best way to educate voters about anything.

He did in Texas, and I wondered if I was the only one that felt hounded by his overexposed ads... All that I felt at the time was, not another *$#!

IMHO, his advertising has been overkill, and I have noticed it on the web for months now.  So to me, this is not something new.

He thinks few have heard of him, he's got 500 mil to burn in 2 months till he's made the official candidate. Spare me.

Oh, and no they don't bother me any more than Geico, Vitamin Water, Burger King's King, or the lady that says she has time in a bottle. And for those that happen to live in a swing state, be happy they are pumping the money into your state's economy.

I had actually never seen an Obama ad before. I never bothered to go to his website. (n.b. That was very facebook like scary infantilism going on IMHO). I received a donation request that overlapped all the function keys of my browser and I swore that regardless of how clever those technowizards can be, that overtaking my program was wrong and I was not going to donate. I was very pissed off.

I already have my home phone number on an internet based answering system. I can't make calls out and I don't even have the phone plugged in. It was the only way to avoid being called by 200 people a week asking for money, mewl, mewl, mewl. The law regarding spam has to be changed so that political campaigns can not just keep sending mail or calling with impunity. Best $20 a month investment I have ever made.

Obama should just do radio for a couple of weeks. He could probably get a deal that ATMs printed out an ad with a receipt for a transaction. No olympics. I want to see athletes, preferably naked (or wrapped in a Tibetan flag!) encouraging people to be more active.

But this strikes me as nothing less than browbeating those of us who do not support him.  There's no evident attempt to unify the party--only an endless drumbeat of "Vote For Obama".

Obama is just going to bombard people with his face, but I think that's a bad idea.  People will get tired of looking at him by August.

Remember, Obama outspent Hillary at least 2 to 1 (in some places 4 to 1) and he didn't win the popular vote and he got the delegate count due to archaric delegate distribution rules.

Here's the FCC rules:  Statutes and Rules on Candidate Appearances & Advertising

and here.

Secondly, imagine they took his ad $$$$.  Say he wants to run a 1 minute spot during the women's floor exercise gymnastics final (which is hugely popular).  McCain would have to be offered an equivalent spot.  Plus, one advertisement would come BEFORE the other one and would create problems with favoritism.  There is no way to run both ads simultaneously.

Seriously, I ALWAYS am sick of political ads well before any election finally happens. I think politicians should use gimmicks like used car salesmen; their ads would be much more entertaining.

He doesn't need to do this. We all know who he is and that he stands for hope and change and bringing a new kind of politics to Washington.

Monks on the mountainside of Tibet know Obama's name and his face and his message. Toddlers could pick him out of a photo lineup. We get it. He's the Democratic nominee for President. He wants our vote. He has my vote.

if you'll recall, his campaign repeatedly stated that primary losses were due to either:

a. racist white people who didn't vote for him.

b. complete lack of name recognition.

Support does not mean no criticism is allowed.  Jeralyn and BTD have both criticized him when they thought he was making a mistake or could have done better.