Talk:Daisy (advertisement)

need to discuss insincerity
The Johnson administration maintained 15,000 nuclear warheads in the US arsenal - the falsehood of this political ad is apparent. I have read political science tracts on this, but don't have the references off the top of my head. 50.111.29.1 (talk) 05:58, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Please read Verifiability, not truth, and supply references from reliable sources to back up any assertion. Thanks a lot for approaching the talk page! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You obviously did not read my post. 50.111.29.1 (talk) 22:49, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Nearly direct quote of an Auden poem
The last lines of the advertisement quoted in the initial section appears to be a restatement of lines from the poem "September 1st, 1939", which contains the line: "We must love one another, or die."

Written as the poem was in the shadow of WW2, it seems unlikely to be a coincidence. Might be worth linking or mentioning on the phrase. I would, but article is locked. 142.154.162.62 (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2022
Please remove

Following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson

and add

Following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson

Since the context is his assumption of office, it would help to specify why he (and not someone else) replaced Kennedy. 120.21.4.98 (talk) 22:33, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅; did both of the requested changes in the same edit. Mignof (talk • contribs) 23:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2022 (2)
Please remove this:

As of the 2020 presidential election, Johnson has gained the highest share of the popular vote in a presidential election since it first became widespread in the 1824 election. The "Daisy" ad is considered one of the most important factors in Johnson's landslide victory over Goldwater.

and add this:

As of the 2020 presidential election, Johnson has gained the highest share of the popular vote in a presidential election since it first became widespread in the 1824 election, and the "Daisy" ad is considered one of the most important factors in his victory.

The removed text is simply redundant, since "landslide victory" is referenced two sentences earlier, and by this point in the article, everyone knows that Goldwater was his opponent. 120.21.4.98 (talk) 22:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅; did both of the requested changes in the same edit. Mignof (talk • contribs) 23:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Daisy (1964).webm, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for January 23, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-01-23. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Serious factual error
This article says that the Daisy Campaign had a major influence on the outcome of the election. However, the source it cites does not say that, and there are other sources that contradict it. While the cited source's title is '“Daisy”: The Most Effective Political Commercial Ever?' nowhere does it say that it impacted the election result. Rather, it seems to be talking about how much of an impact it made on future political ads. Furthermore, the claim that it was decisive is at least somewhat contradicted by sources like this one: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/09/07/daisy-girl-political-ad-still-haunting-50-years-later/15246667/ Himajin5 (talk) 01:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)


 * And here's another source that contradicts the assertion even more strongly: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2011/11/26/point-person-our-qa-with-author-robert-mann-on-lbj-daisy-girl-ads-impact/
 * "Did this ad really work? Goldwater was far behind and he lost by a huge margin.
 * Legend is that the spot destroyed Goldwater’s candidacy, but I don’t believe it did. Anyone who suggests that the spot destroyed Goldwater would have to prove he was ever in the campaign with a chance to win. He wasn’t. From beginning to end, his poll numbers were always hovering around the mid-20s to low 30s.
 * That said, it’s interesting that after a monthlong barrage of [other] Johnson ads portraying Goldwater as a dangerous man who might blow up the world, Goldwater’s numbers in the Gallup polls actually edged up 3 points and Johnson’s numbers dropped by 4.
 * But polls did show the ad and other spots raised fears that a nuclear war was more likely under a President Goldwater. Fears dramatically increased that he was likely to get the United States into a war." Himajin5 (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)