It wasn’t supposed to end up like this.

Everything was planned in advanced. Variables accounted for. Ducks in a row and what not.

But then He had to go and rip up the script.

Tons of research and preparation, wasted. All because He had to go and grab an early victory.

I’m speaking, of course, about Trump.

The Preamble

There’s a lot to like about Southern California. The weather. The culture. The beautiful landscapes and people.

But perhaps my favorite over all others, is that it’s conveniently located about as FAR away as possible from Washington DC. We’re so far removed from politics that it’s kinda scary. Not in a crazy, Texas secession way. But more in a, “OMG did you hear what Kim and Kanye named their baby?” kinda way. The sad truth is that most people have no idea what’s going on outside of here. Call it superficial. Self-centered. Egocentric even.

Couldn’t argue with any of that. And I relish it.

A few weeks ago, I thought it would interesting (and humorous) to DECLARE — authoritatively! — who the next winner of the United States would be, judged solely by their Facebook ads. Because as we’ve established, I know literally nothing about the real issues. (Which, after about an hours worth of research, turns out is the same amount Trump seemingly does. Maybe I have a shot at being his running mate?!)

The idea went over well, and there was going to be two initial rounds (Trump vs. Cruz and Hillary vs. Bernie), with a third closer to the actual election that would pit the two primary winners against each other. There was going to be expert quotes, and other fancy bells and whistles.

Everything was set.

Then that A-hole Cruz threw in the towel. And Trump smiled like this:

That’s OK though. I’m good at making stuff up adjusting on the fly. We’ll still compare a few ads (you won’t want to miss Trump’s Facebook rants that appear in a few minutes).

But first, how’d we get here? And why are we even talking about this?

A 3 Minute Discourse on Political Advertising in America

2007 was the good old days. The final Harry Potter book was published. Apple introduced the iPhone. A gallon of gas only cost $3.38.

OK… so not much has changed in retrospect. (Besides that whole economoy thing.)

J.K. Rowling is still churning out good books. Apple continues to introduce cool stuff. And the price of gas, while still relatively high, has fallen a bit.

But somewhere along the line, Dan Siroker of Optimizely was hired as the Director of Analytics for Obama’s 2008 campaign. And he helped Obama eventually become Internet-famous with uber-nerds everywhere (oh, also POTUS) by using conversion optimization to net an additional $60 mil. At the time, unheard-of.

Only $22.25 million TOTAL was spent on digital ads back in ’08. Which is like what, one Super Bowl ad?! And not even a good one. Probably just the ones in the 3rd Quarter when no one’s paying attention anymore. Fast forward to the next election in 2012, and that figure rose (moderately) to $159 million. That’s a little closer to a prime 1st Quarter Super Bowl Ad, but not quite there yet.

Forecasts are a bit different for this upcoming year’s election, though. There’s been a few developments over the past few years. You know, that SnapChat thing everyone sends inappropriate pictures on. Facebook splashing out billions on every popular, unprofitable social network in sight. Political ad spending (in total) could reach $11.4 billion, about 20% more than in 2012.

But what’s interesting, is that the digital slice of the pie is forecasted — at a minimum — to top $1 BILLION (with a ‘B’) dollars (American, not Monopoly). For those keeping track at home, that’s a 5000% increase since 2008!

And by 2020? If the Zombie Apocalypse doesn’t get us first, ad spending on digital media could go up to $3.3 billion dollars.

Digital’s prominent rise was on display, literally, this year when Facebook co-sponsored a Republican presidential debate with undoubtedly the future ground zero of the aforementioned Zombie Apocalypse, Fox News. Director of Research firm Borrell, Corey Elliott, told the Los Angeles Times: “In 2016, broadcast TV will still get about 1 out of every 2 political ad dollars, but by 2020, it will drop to almost 1 out of 3.”

Ad spending, in and of itself, is simply a laggard,though. It’s a reaction, or a response, to the shifting trends of how media’s being consumed.

How about these truth bombs from Google (juvenile asides, mine):

• Since April 2015, people have watched more than 110 million hours of candidate- and issues-related content on YouTube. (That’s a lot of Pug videos.)
• That’s 100X the amount of time it would take to watch all content ever aired on CNN, C-Span, MSNBC, and Fox News combined (So dogs going down slides > ‘professional’ news.)
• Searches for election-related content on YouTube have grown by nearly 4X since presidential candidates started making their announcements last April (Mostly Xanax searches when Trump won.)
• While 59% of people who turn to online video to learn more about the candidates are under the age of 35, one in four are over the age of 45.3 (So it ain’t just the trendy millennials.)

Surprisingly, there is actually — GASP! — growing interest in the real issues. Search volume as grown on these topics over the past few months as candidate’s campaigns began appearing:

Maybe there is hope for America after all.

(Wait, what’s that? Budweiser’s changing their name to America?)

Nevermind. Please redact that last statement.

The Anatomy of a Loser: Comparing 5 Ted Cruz Facebook Ads to Trumps, Well, You’ll See…

Now that you have a basic understanding of Facebook advertising’s potential influence, let’s take a look at the original objective of this article:

Who’s ads are better: Cruz vs. Trump?

1. Who Doesn’t Love Free S.W.A.G.?

The first thing you’ll notice about Cruz’ ads are the design. They’re good. Very good.

The visual aesthetic is consistent, they’re personalized to state events and even include a little visual call-to-action.

The offer? Meh. I guess stickers can be cool?

Get ready to jump in your time machine, though, and head back to your childhood. Trump’s s.w.a.g. offer is, yes – that’s right, the official yard sign!

This is also one of The Donald’s better ads, complete with professional photography and a clear CAPS LOCKED call to action. Not too bad so far.

2. Dope Apparel Bro

I understand the need for s.w.a.g., but was unaware politicians also hit the runways this time of year. (Maybe Kanye should fill them in on how tough that business really is?)

First up, you can see the entire Ted Cruz Fall 2015 collection in this multi-product shot, which surprisingly doesn’t look too terrible! Say what you want about Cruz, but the guy’s hired some good designers.

The Shop Now CTA is used properly, while the content uses both ‘click here’ and ‘new’ which is one of the most powerful copywriting words you can use.

Not to be outdone in the threads department, Trump showcases that infamous red hat with his campaign’s slogan: “Make America Great Again”.

The photo is an iconic shot, with his supporters rallying in the background, cheering on while he triumphantly acknowledges them. This hero shot stands out, and reinforces social proof that’s again touched on in the copy below.

There’s also a clear CTA with a link. Good stuff from the Donald!

3. Get Your Caucus On

Speaking of hero images, here’s Cruz looking at something on the ceiling off into the distance with a thoughtful gaze. It’s also another example of how personalization can cut through the noise and get people to emotionally buy-in.

This ad is a rallying cry, as the headline boldly (and literally) calls Iowa to action. It does it’s job, grabbing your attention instantly. While the supporting copy continues calling for Iowan’s to support the cause.

Again, a strong outing from Teddy:

Aaaaannndddd here’s where things begin to fall off the rails a bit.

In Trump’s ad there is a clear call to action, and the reinforcement of the tagline or slogan of his campaign. But you have to dig through a bunch of other rambling content to find it. Less might have been more in this case, as distractions can negatively impact conversions ultimately.

In addition, the seemingly amateurish, homemade video is shockingly mediocre for such a high profile event. Maybe it’s part of his ‘everyman’ appeal? Either way, not a great example of utilizing the power of YouTube marketing.

4. Don’t Blame Me. Blame Isis.

This next set of ads is as close as the Republicans got to tackling any issues through advertising (compared to Hillary & Bernie, which we’ll review soon). However, they both do a good job at pounding home this powerful rhetoric that ISIS is to blame. (Again, geopolitical & foreign policy issues aside.)

An age-old copywriting trick to evoke empathy from your audience is to absolve them of fault. Blaming a third party (whether that’s Obama, ISIS, or whoever) actually creates a common bond and helps unites people together.

Cruz’ ad is perfect then. It opens with very strong copy setting the stage. It has a BuzzFeed-esque headline. The image is a brilliant metaphor that subtly uses visual storytelling to immediately translate an otherwise abstract concept.

If selling a point of view’s the goal, this one is textbook.

Compare that to Donald‘s semi-rant here, and it’s kind of a head scratcher. On the face of it, it’s bad. There’s no clear objective, inspiring image, or ‘thing’ for people to do.

But it’s also pure Trump. You can see him sitting down and typing this out. Probably on some kind of gold throne, in his gold office with gold crowned molding. His blunt, unpolished approach is exactly why he appeals to people. And it only supports the opening line in this message, highlighting the fact that he’s self-funding everything so he won’t spend big money on flash social ads.

I dunno… maybe he is some kind of advertising evil genius after all.

5. The ‘Powerful’ Endorsements

The word ‘endorsements’ has never been used more loosely than this.

Endorsements are one of the most powerful forms of social proof available. Especially if you can get people that are so widely known and respectable that there’s broad appeal. The use of celebrity endorsements in presidential races dates back to the Golden Era when Frank, Dean and Sammy supported JFK. (WTF happened to popular music BTW?)

Old Ted got Rush. ‘Nough said.

The ad is good though, again with signature clear calls to action. They also effectively use Rush’s quote or testimonial as a powerful sales tool. The image, like almost all of the ones from Cruz so far, is great.

I have no idea who Franklin Graham is. Literally had to Google the evangelist.

Highlighting ‘niche’ celebrities like this is no different than influencer marketing, helping you to appeal to a very specific group of people. Trump also uses part of Franklin’s quote to support his overall narrative, which helps him deliver a decent ad in the end.

So… Why’d Trump Win?

Truthfully? I have no idea. I can tell you one thing definitively:

Donald Trump did NOT beat Cruz because of his Facebook ads.

Because they weren’t great. While Cruz’ were.

But if I had to guess, it’d be this:

Look at any news program, television or otherwise. That includes magazines and newspapers. Blogs and social accounts. I dare you to try and NOT find the word ‘Trump’ plastered somewhere. In the end, rightfully or wrongfully, The Don excelled at raising ‘organic’ (as opposed to paid) interest and attention. He outperformed every single nominee in that aspect.

And for his success, Trump will go on to our final round in a few months when we pick this back up (after reviewing Hillary and Bernie soon).

But in the meantime, if you’re looking for advertising lessons and inspiration, look no further than good old Ted.

Because Cruz delivered a surprisingly good advertising performance, despite how the actual results have panned out for him.