Actor Matt Damon Political Pundit and Jester
According to actor Matt Damon Sarah Palin is an “absurd” thought. And McCain has a 1/3 chance of dying in office…Oh and let’s not forget that he says “It’s like a really bad Disney movie”.
Nah, nah, nah nah, hey, hey, hey…goodbye (to Matt’s career). He just insulted half of the country and threw Disney under the bus.
I guess this is no surprise as Matt Damon is from Boston and Massachusetts is historically a democrat state. Add to it he’s now from Hollywood and is a liberal.
Here’s my take on it. Matt Damon like the band?Heart should just shut their pie holes and protect their own brand image. Putting yourself out there in a heated election just pisses the other side off. Like me.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but when you’re a star the rules change for you. You have to protect your brand first and foremost.
Matt Damon just made 48% of the voting population pretty mad. Instead of trashing Sarah Palin why not do something more constructive like pointing out why Obama/Biden are better.?Trashing someone over your political views?is bad business, especially in the movie business.
What do you think? Should these stars come out and trash the other side?
If you think Matt was a nincompoop for making this video click on the VOTE FOR ME? button below.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
September 11th, 2008 at 12:50 am
I have watched Matt Damon and was excited about his movies, but now, man I just can’t believe he has his facts so backwards. It is like he formed his opinion without even taking in some of the facts. First, historically, the founders of this country intended that any individual who understood principle could serve in public office, whether mayor, or president. Experience is nice, but not a requisite, ask Obama. The question is based in their deep beliefs and how they ultimately decide to represent their citizens. I have not held political office, but if faced against Putin, it seems that we operate upon principle. First we recognize the severity of the challenge, we isolate all possible avenues, we respond firmly, and we go to the dialectic and hammer out every possible situation and gather all likely outcomes. We bounce our thoughts off our friends, we look to our represented and ask the question, if one of the represented could choose, how would they choose based upon the options available. We do what our founding fathers asked us to do, we represent those who place trust in us. We understand this in every facet of our existence, experience is a a daily event, there is not a minute that goes by that we haven’t made a decision which compounds our experience.
Move to the issues everyone.
Both McCaine and Obama have not specified with detail how they will turn our dependence on oil around. I think it no different than a CEO having to explain to the Board of Directors how they plan correcting slumping sales. One wouldn’t see a CEO say, I will add more advertisement. No, heck no! He would say, We are going to run three months of advertising on 13 of the 150 cable channels. And here is the crutch, the thing we all need to be saying. HOW!. A CEO would say, we are going to cut the dividends by 3 % for the next six months, we are going to advertise this line of ads, (which are then previewed by the BOD) and we will air them on the following cable channels because our research shows that our audience is engaged primarily in these channels from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm. Our criteria for success will be an increase in sales by 7% on four of six products advertised. We will review profit margins on these products 8 times a quarter. We have already worked with the cable companies A, B, C, D, E and each have agreed to allow a renewal after each month. If our profit margins slump after the first two months then we will survey the audience and present our findings to the BOD before the first day of third month. Seems long and detailed but darn it that is what we need.
I think we need to know how McCain get nuclear power plants up, who will pay, how do we finance their construction and their maintenance. How much will it cost for construction, how much for maintenance? Which states have agreed to allow construction, which communities have agreed? How many plants will be built? What is the percentage of energy consumption that will be offset and what impact on our dependence on oil.
These are the same questions for Obama, How is he going to get private companies who have nothing to loose to venture in to this new hybrid, electric car CNG era? Who will pay for the incentives. How much taxes or budget cuts will need to be made. What impact will 1 million green cars have on our 50 plus million car nation?
Demand a Plan. No more talk about the amorphous ideals and lets demand some plans. 50 or so days left and we will be in a decision time and quite frankly, none of them have convinced me that their plans will work, so I look for their deep beliefs and bet on what I can anticipate they will do in representing me. Knowledge of the person, who they gather around them, who their family in will be the way we finally decide. Obama isn’t looking good in any of those departments.
Eric
September 14th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Huh. I guess I’m not clear on the irony. So…it’s ok for you to jump in on Matt’s personal brand, and imply the real issue is his partisanship, but it’s not ok for Matt to voice a partisan opinion.
John Jantsch once said that if you’re not pissing someone off then you don’t have much of a brand. I’m willing to bet your blog posts include the advice to not try to be all things to all people. And your blog lives that advice. So, besides the content of his opinion, why is it a problem when Matt or anyone else uses their platform to do so.
So, then foghorn-leghorn, Fred Thompson should….what? I don’t remember seeing an opinion from you on that. And God forbid, someone should include a discussion of Ronald Reagan in this category.
I don’t recall reading the clause that precluded anyone from using what ever platform they have to voice their opinion regardless if it’s a TV interview or a blog.
The best content on this blog is the comment from Eric. And for that, I tip my hat to you for giving him his platform.
But seriously, Matt’s behavior is no different than yours in response. And neither will have any impact on the election nor your personal brands.
September 14th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
It’s not just Matt, although this interview is bad for his image. Matt’s brand is to be everything to everyone, he’s a movie star. I’m just a lowly branding guy with but just a few readers. BIG difference don’t you think?
It’s all stars/musicians and their opinions. When they come out like this it hurts their brand (where are the Dixie Chicks now). It’s great to have an opinion but just rephrase the conversation. Be positive about why you like someone else and avoid trashing the other.
I personally was really bothered by this. Don’t you think he could have spun it another way? Here’s why Obama’s better…
Certainly my blog and Matts comments are not the same. I’m writing on branding, that’s my expertise. Matt’s not a politician. Big difference. We’ll have to agree to disagree there.