The Cringiest and Craftiest 2026 Midterm Ads

I think what we're seeing right now are candidates that want to seem human and real and warm and that's actually happening across all branding. I think we're having a capture moment, you know, prove you're not a robot. This is the opinions I'm Steve Stromberg, where a few weeks out from the 2026 midterms and as someone who covers politics for the opinion section, I have seen a lot of political ads. If you live in Ohio or Maine or Michigan, you know what I mean. I've been dying to discuss a few with Carlos and Emily. Hi guys. Hi. Good to see you. Carlos Lazada is a calmness for times opinion and Emily Keegan is a photo editor and creative consultant just to get us started. I'm wondering, is there a political ad or a slogan that is really stuck with you? Maybe it's the first one you remember or one that stood out something that can really show how powerful these images, these words, these slogans can be when they really work. Carlos, why don't you start? Sure. I think the one that I remember from a young age probably has to be Ronald Reagan's morning in America ad from 1984 from his re-election campaign. It's morning again in America. Today, more men and women will go to work than ever before in our country's history. And I think I remember it in part because my father just loved Reagan and I wasn't so crazy about him. Not that I had like strong, strong views at the time. But the ad was so optimistic, right? It kind of captures that kind of very sunny Reagan vibe. The ad says, you know, it's morning again in America and people are like getting married and buying homes and raising the flag. And it's like, why would you want to go back to how things were four years ago, you know? And like, poor Jimmy Carter. But I think that ad probably has stuck with me as kind of one of the classic ads of just optimism. And that's where the whole like, are you better off when you were four years ago, kind of like comes into it as well. You know, the case was like, things are better stick with me. The ad I come back to over and over again is the Daisy ad by LBJ in 1964. Six, eight, nine, nine, eight, seven, six, five, four, three, two, one. These are the stakes. And the idea here is to play on fear. And to say, don't you want someone you know will protect you and your family. And what's interesting to me about this ad is not only that it is a horrifying ad to watch. It is incredibly effective. But that it's then used over and over again in the seventies. And then again, in during the 1984 re-election campaign, Mondele uses a very similar ad structure. And it's the same concept you use a child and you put you place that child against the biggest fear that we have. And this cycle, I think what's interesting is how little fear we're seeing in the advertisements that are becoming viral or that we see on a national stage. In a headline, what's the mood of this midterm election? Sure. I'm not one for vibe checks and mood checks and the like. But I think if we had to pick one, the mood of the midterms right now to me feels best captured by House Speaker Mike Johnson. Wondering aloud recently, if maybe after the election, you might have to move back to Louisiana and start a lawn care business. Those are not the musings of a confident man. And meanwhile on the Democratic side, you hear a lot about expanding the map, which is the term you always hear in elections when one side is just daring to dream. And it's so confident that it imagines blue spreading all over the place. So the expectations seem pretty cemented at this point for a big night for Democrats, so much so that I instinctively, in a contrarian way, like I'm not trusting it. So we'll have to wait, wait for the vote. Right, with that, let's start with our first ad. The Washington Post did an analysis of 8,000 midterm ads. The majority focused on the economy, so affordability, housing, the cost of living. But the first ad we're going to watch went in a different direction. It's for Steve Hilton. He's the Republican running for governor of California. Let's watch. I've just never done anything like this before. Like, what do my dad finds out? Just try it. Look, give me your hand. Close your eyes. And I'll do all the work. See, if you're just listening and want to see the ads, you can hop over to YouTube. What we just saw was a video of two young ladies on a bed seemingly talking about one thing, but then filling in an absentee ballot for Steve Hilton, the Republican running for governor. And then the ad ends by saying Steve Hilton for governor, just try it. Emily, you're our California resident. What do you think? Well, I think the reaction is just Ick. It's like very, very Icky. This one, because of its Ick factor, I think, went viral. So at least we're talking about it, I suppose. And it's because Icky is, does that make you want to vote for the man who created it? I'm not sure that you want to be sexualizing young girls in 2026. I don't I'm not sure that that's going to inspire a lot of voters. It's just Ick. Carlos, what do you see here? Well, let's just stipulate the sort of creepiness and and and tackiness of of the ad. I was just wondering like is this sort of like some like older guys fantasy of what young lesbians are like, you know, it was very. You know, the pride flag and the nose rings and the tattoos and the hair dye it was all it was all a bit much, but like that aside, two things really jumped out at me. One was the moment when the the reluctant voter, right, who's almost kind of being coerced into into voting for Hilton here says, what if my dad finds out it reminded me immediately of the the ad in 2024. When you have these kind of like progressive suburban women married to like Trumpi guys who are secretly voting for Kamala Harris right and like don't want their husbands to know right now instead of keeping your vote secret from your conservative husband. It's keeping it secret from your progressive parents right, but it kind of paints voting for one side is this thing that you're kind of forced to do. Whereas voting for the other side is this thing that you're free to do. It's like, you know, this is kind of liberation. The only other thing I'll say is that I don't have a problem necessarily with ads that feature sex or imply sex sex is for better for worse has always been a political issue in the United States. This ad, the Hilton ad, it just uses sex to try to get us interested in the candidate without any substance to it. And so to me, that's why it's it's a fail not because it's salacious, but because it's salacious with no other purpose except for being salacious. Okay, let's stay on the west coast and head far to the north to Alaska where I recently spent some time reporting on Mary Peltola's Senate campaign. She is a Democrat, but you might not necessarily know that from this ad. If it's not good for Alaska, it's not getting my vote forget party, forget politics with me Alaska comes first. I earned an a rating from the NRA. I took on Joe Biden to secure the border. Emily, what do you make of this? Peltola isn't the most polished candidate, but she has a lot of Alaska first authenticity. Does that come through convincingly? Can you unpack some of the images that she uses? I don't think this is a hugely successful ad in so far is that it's pretty standard. I think we've seen this type of political ad a lot. And I, to be perfectly candid, I don't think that advertisements alone get a candidate elected in the same way I don't think you bought the shoes on your feet because of an advertisement, right? It's a lot that goes into what we choose to buy or who we choose to vote for, you know, most often it's about our relationship to the brand or our relationship to the party long term or who are friends and family members are supporting or buying on the shelves, right? I guess if you do look at all presidential campaign ads, say starting in 1952, you do notice that the winners tend to do a handful of things over and over again. And you do notice that the losers have a tendency to make certain choices over and over again. So to talk about good ads, what you want to see, whether you're a shoe brand or you're a politician, you want to see the same principles that you use in classic propaganda, really, which is that you want a simple image and a simple slogan that when seen together, inspire in the viewer, a big and kind of complicated feeling. And that feeling can be hope, it can be optimism, it could be fear. But look at classic 20th century propaganda, look at Rosie the Riveter, right? Simple image, arm up, eyes facing forward, simple slogan, we can do it. And that together inspires in you some hope, some optimism or my personal favorite, smokey the bear, right? Simple image, bear in hat, pointing at you. And the text, only you, right, so romantic, so powerful, only you can stop fires. And we want those same principles and advertising, you see it all the time, you know, think different as a classic example, right? If you're speeding down the highway, you want to be able to engage with it and understand it easily and quickly, if you're scrolling same. So what Mary's doing here is something that do candidates have a tendency to do, which is that they center themselves in the ad, they focus on their biography and their accomplishments, and they show themselves politicking. And one of the biggest things that I think politicians do, a mistake that politicians make is that they think they are more charismatic than they are. And so they put themselves in their ads and clip, you know, pieces of speeches. And it's just not as compelling as they think they are, right? You really want to create an advertisement that is smokey the bear, right? Bear in hat says great slogan. And the best ads, the most popular ads and the ones that stick have that. And frankly, you know, Hilton's ads terrible in comparison, right? We've just spoken about that. But it is something that sticks because it's a simple image with a simple piece of text attached to it. Carlos, what did you make of Peltola's pitch here? Yeah. You joke at the beginning that, you know, it might be hard to remember that she's a Democrat from this ad. And to be honest, when I was going through these ads, and I was watching them with my wife, and I had to turn to her and be like, wait, she's the Democrat in the race, right? You know, just, she's like, oh, of course she is, right, right, just, I had a brain freeze for a second because of the ad. And I think that's very deliberate. She literally says at the beginning, forget party, forget politics, right? It's trying to help voters forget that she's the Democrat and all the baggage that label has, right? What she doesn't want you to forget is her NRA rating is the fact that she, you know, stuck it to Biden on the border, the fact that she's like, you know, pro like oil projects development. When she says something that seems vaguely critical of President Trump, she doesn't even name him, right? She says, I have no tolerance for any politicians who, you know, use the office to get rich. That is not. It could be even just a generalized attack on DC. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. It's very like anti-conventional politician, you know, like they're all corrupt, pox on both their houses kind of thing. It's a smart move when you're running in a state that Donald Trump won by 13 percentage points last time around. You recently wrote about about Valtola. So I'd be interested in your thoughts, and there's this moment in your piece, I believe, and correct me if I'm getting it wrong, where you're talking to her and trying to get her to engage on like what a kind of broader centrist or center left vision would be like for the party on a national level. And she just doesn't engage, right? Either she's not. Totally. She's not willingly refused or not or not or not able to. Right. And that comes across in this. It doesn't feel like a pose. It feels like this is who she is, Alaska first, Alaska always completely parochial in kind of the smartest way. Yeah. No, that's exactly right. It does come off as authentic, and as you point out, there are just a ton of Republican coded issues highlighted in this ad. But one thing that did strike me is that even though she emphasizes how Alaska focused she is, she highlights a national issue, and that national issue is securing the border. And she's a candidate, remember, in Alaska, which is as far north of the southern border as you can get, doesn't have a huge undocumented population. So it sort of shows the extent to which immigration has become a cultural issue that defined people's political identity. And it's not just saying that she favors securing the border. She says that she opposed Biden's border policies, right? It's also a sign of how she realizes that the Biden brand is not a strong one. For the Democrats, and so she's creating distance there. Right. And she was in Congress during the Biden administration, so she asked to come back and say, well, I wasn't for all that, and this is one way that she does that. I mean, one way to look at the ad is Alaska Democrats don't need to worry too much about keeping the left on side, and can go really hard for disgruntled Trump voters. You know, there are a lot of those in Alaska and some of these other red-to-purple states. Quick PSA, whatever you are feeling curious or concerned about, whether it is politics, AI or what fantastic shows you'll want to stream this weekend. You can search for it in the New York Times, and you can do it without paywalls for a full month when you download the Times app. Better still, you'll get access to the back catalog of our Fantastic Show and all of the Times's Fantastic Shows. So, run, do not walk, download the app today. Let's move on to our next ad. This one is from Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She is running for re-election as governor of Arkansas. Unlike Peltola, her party affiliation is pretty clear in this spot, so let's take a look. Yeah. Oh, you want some of this? Come on. That has turned relaxing into a full-time profession, but you, you actually work hard. You pay taxes to cover welfare for guys like Brad who just choose not to work. That's why I launched a welfare to work requirement. Now more are Kansas are working than ever before, even Brad. So what we just saw for the listeners out there is a young man, a young white man in a dark room playing video games and munching on chips and various other bad-for-you things. At the end though, he puts on a tie and is presumably employed. So Carlos Huckabee Sanders is basically a shoe-in to get re-elected, but this spot drew a lot of backlash with some Maga guys calling it anti-white and anti-men. What do you see here? Yeah. I mean, I think it's an aggressive ad to be sure. I mean, most welfare recipients in Arkansas are white, so I don't quite grasp the racial complaint here. The gender one, I think, is more interesting. There's a long history of personalizing political rhetoric around specific kinds of welfare recipients casting them as lazy or as fraudsters. I mean, you know, Reagan in the '70s was quite good at this. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, I think, is trying to have it sort of both ways. First, she does blame Brad, right, when she introduces him, you know, "Meet Brad." Brad is turned relaxing into a full-time profession, and she stresses the word "choose" that Brad has chosen to behave this way, to do this, that he's choosing not to work. But then she also suggests that it's really a matter of incentives, right? It's not just that Brad has terrible character, right? It's that the system is set up in such a way that if you tweak it, right, you create this requirement, Brad will clean up, put on a tie, and get to work, right? So it's both kind of blaming Brad and blaming the system writ large. I think it's also easier to criticize her because this ad could have been done with a kind of generic voiceover, right, kind of a faceless narrator, but instead she puts herself forward, right? You see Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She's on the TV screen. On the screen. Yeah. Right at the beginning, and she says, you know, that's why I created this requirement. You know, she's very much taking full ownership of it in a way that these ads sometimes don't do. One little detail that I find interesting in this ad is that there's a sense in which she's telling it with a bit of a wink, right? If you hear her voice at the very beginning, she's not just saying meet Brad. She's kind of laughing. She's just meet Brad, right? There's this little undercurrents of laughter as she's saying it. And she's like, you know, Brad's turned relaxing into a full-time profession, right? There's like a little smirk there, right? And so what is that? Is that her mocking Brad a little bit? Or is that kind of her acknowledging that, look, this is a caricature, right? You know, this is a little bit of a joke, it's a little bit funny. Because Brad does look funny. He's throwing the cheese puffs in the air or they're falling. on his face. He's way too into the video game, right? And sometimes I find that, I mean, clearly that was a choice, right? Like, I'm sure they shot this many times and, you know, choosing to have her laugh a little bit when she's saying those things is something very deliberate. When people inject that undercurrent of laugh into something they're saying, they're creating some distance from the point they're making, right? They're trying to say, look, this is not exactly, you know, an attack. I don't fully stand by this, but I'm just going to put it out there anyway, right? And of course, the last thing I thought of is that when I think of Brad as a character, I immediately thought of other kind of fictional characters that are created in political ads. And I thought of Pajama Boy. If you remember, Pajama Boy. Yeah. Pajama Boy. And Obama's Pajama Boy. And you know, it's this guy in this, like, kind of, you know, holiday one Z drinking hot chocolate talking about how you got to sign up for Obamacare, right? And it also made me think of Julia. I don't know if you remember the life of Julia was this slide show that the Obama administration put out showing all the ways that women kind of like are cared for by the state throughout their lives, you know, from head start to health care. And, you know, that got some criticism because it was kind of a nanny state vibe. But I just imagined I wonder what Brad and Pajama Boy and Julia would say to each other if they could sit down and talk about the role of government in their lives. Emily, I would love to hear from you. What did you make of the laugh? If anything, what did you make of the imagery? Well, I think the strangest part for me is that she put herself on the TV. And I understand this kind of in the narrative of the story. But that's not something that most candidates do. They usually put their opponent on the TV. And there are a lot of those ads. That's like a trope that's been going on since the 60s, really. You put your opponent on the TV and you talk and you show the opponent, you know, flip-flopping or saying something that you think you disagree with, right? And the reason you put the opponent on the TV is that the TV kind of acts as a barrier and a remove from everyday life, from the concerns of the every man. And it isolates the candidate. So when I see her on the TV, it's like that's big brother vibe a little bit. That's an interesting choice. I think it's probably fine. It works fine for the ad, but it's something most candidates don't do. Put themselves on the TV like that. And it also, it does sort of feel like, well, this is the state government that's going to drop in and make you shape up and put on that tie. It feels to me a little bit like an attempt to play into the alpha male beta male thinking on the right. She's making alpha males out of beta males like Brad. And maybe that shuckle is, we all kind of know a Brad in our lives. In the process, she gets to make the old, well fair queen attack lines seem new and sort of less race oriented. But to me, this all still feels a little bit like a throwback, right? Like an old different era of Republican politics. Even the lazy kid living in the basement thing feels pretty last decade. I mean, so does this work? Well, it's also weirdly, it's one of the more substantive ads I've seen in this campaign in that, you know, it's not just biographical, it's not just like shock value, like the Hilton ad. It's sort of like engaging on a policy issue and that feels like a throwback to me, you know? Like maybe being substantive is a luxury you have when you are very likely to win reelection. And or you have a record that has substance behind it, which not everyone, not every politician can, can claim. Okay, uh, let's get to our next ad, our final ad. We're looking at an ad out of Michigan from the Democratic candidate Abdul El Sayed. Where did Abdul El Sayed come from? Here. Where his grandparents? We helped raise him. He became a doctor. He always wanted to help people. He got all those kids glasses. Eliminated medical dad. He buys us groceries every way he knows. All right, for the listeners out there, we saw an elderly couple on a sofa discussing their grandson Abdul El Sayed. There are some images of El Sayed campaigning with Bernie Sanders. At the very end, he emerges and gives the grandparents a hug. So Carlos, this ad reminds me of when President Obama referred to himself as a skinny kid with a funny name when he came to national attention in 2004. And Obama followed that up by talking about how his family is from Kansas, his grandfather fought in patents army. Is that what El Sayed is channeling here? You know, this ad and in some ways, this campaign has given me a lot of Obama flashbacks to that period. You know, there's been efforts to paint Abdul El Sayed is something of an outsider, especially just the way that the grandmother says it, where did he come from? She's channeling that feeling. People have often used his full name in a very unsuttle way to depict him as sort of distant and foreign and untrustworthy Abdul-Rachman Muhammad El Sayed. And that's just like Barack Hussein Obama. It's a very similar kind of approach. The opening of the ad where you have the grandmother seemingly playing into that kind of like ominous, you know, suspicious tone before pivoting to the lovely like he's from here, you know, we love him. He's our grandson. It reminded me of it's another Obama moment, but it's actually about Obama's opponent in 2008 Don McCain. And there was that famous instance where it's a McCain rally and an elderly white woman. You know, she has the mic and she's asking McCain a question. I can't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's not. He's not. He's an Arab. He is not. No, no man. No man. He's a he's a decent family man citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on on fundamental issues. And that's what this campaign is all about. He's not. Thank you. When I saw this ad, you know, I thought like, oh, you know, that that face that the grandmother is making where she's pretending to be suspicious of him, that could have been the face of that woman that you never see in at the at the McCain rally. And finally, like Obama also, you know, else I had is kind of relying on these lovely, you know, white grandparents to sort of vouch for him. You know, if look, if you worry about me, worry about my name or something, look at Judy, look at Jan, you know, they're harmless. They're sweet and they love me, right? And that was not just the way that I think Obama felt compelled to use that part of his biography, but it's also in a weird way. It's kind of like how he picked Biden, this like a vancular guy who you all know who's been there forever, who will be with me when I'm in the White House. If you don't quite know me or don't quite trust me. Yeah. Emily, what do you see in this ad? Can I be a photo nerd for a minute? Can I talk about this for a minute? Please. But I find there's this like really kind of beautiful overlap between how politicians want to present themselves either as the adult in the room part of the establishment, having a long history of success versus being an outsider, being of the people, being just like you and me, right? These two directions. And if we look at photography, photography really could be split into two. One is photography that's made by professionals. This is the kind of photography you traditionally you see in magazines, television. And by photography, I mean photography and film. And this kind of photography is made by professionals with high-quality cameras and the results are kind of a clean lighting and flat even horizon lines and bold colors. And there's never grain and there's never fingerprints and there's never dust. And this is establishment photography. And then there's the kind of photography that's made by amateurs. This is the kind of photography that you and I know really well because this is what we make. And it's made with disposable cameras and your iPhone. And it's made with cheap consumer grade equipment. And so what that looks like is it looks like a mess. It often is not slick in video. Think of like a camcorder or super-ate. You see dust flying across the screen. And the other important part of amateur photography is that because we have used cheaper equipment, we often see grain or digital noise in that imagery. So those are the hallmarks of these two types of photography. And people in advertising pick different pieces of those two types to communicate with us silently. They don't have to say anything. We know immediately how we should be interacting with the content because of the quality of the film and the choices that are made by that photographer or by that advertiser. The same is happening in this advertisement. He's using the aesthetics of amateur photography. The photography that we understand and it comes from our own background in our own homes. But the imagery that he's showing is full of grain. We have have sprockets on some of them, it's full of mistakes, there's some light leaks, it looks like, there's some super eight kind of vibes happening, it looks like things that we understand to be of the home of ourselves and of the popular, it's a populist look at this point. - Yeah. - If the sound was off, if you never heard anything that was said in this ad, you would know where he stands, you would know what he comes from and what he believes in, because he's not using establishment photography, he's using the photography of every man of the citizen. And his opponent's doing the same thing as it turns out. - And this is something that you might think would die out with generational change and technological change, but do you find that it's not because people use Instagram filters and they manipulate their digital images to convey precisely those sorts of messages, right? It just compounds, the more we use photography, the more we understand all of those small details. And we are photographers too. And so advertisers will use the language, the vernacular that we are the most familiar with, which is your iPhone to connect with you. - All right, you mentioned an ad from LSA, it's opponent, Mike Rogers, we do have that. So why don't we quickly watch that and then we can compare and contrast? - I grew up middle class and never forgot where I came from. When Wall Street wanted you to bail them out, I voted no. When America's auto industry needed a lifeline, I voted yes, because Michigan comes first. - All right, so the ad is titled "Where I Came From." So there are a lot of politics of identity in this ad also. The ad shows Mike Rogers in a button-up shirt, but with no tie and he's talking about his neighborhood, which you see and you see Michigan values is sort of stamped on the screen as the ad proceeds. Emily, can you do a comparing contrast for us? - Right, so I think one of the things that's also interesting about both of these campaigns is that they're using a lot of collage animation and typography that has a sense of texture to it, which we're seeing across the culture outside of politics. But part of the reason that we're seeing this is this backlash to AI and backlash to technology. And the using both those kind of amateur photography aesthetic plus this kind of cut and paste feel to the text and the type is to show an interest in the human hand and an interest is something that's authentic and tactile, which is, if we think about what that means politically, it means that the politician is anti-establishment, anti-tech and kind of more of tried field grassroots, trying to feel human. - Great, so I think the big, if not the dominant theme this year, is that candidates recognize that this is an anti-establishment environment. They're trying various strategies to deal with it. People hate the parties. Hilton runs away from his party label and mentions almost nothing of substance. Peltola goes hard on local issues. Huckabee Sanders reverts to this sort of old school or a public in message. Elsie had associated himself with this sort of insurgent anti-establishment left. He's hugging Bernie Sanders in his ad. Mike Rogers claims he has always been a working class populist. So they're appealing to different constituencies, many of these candidates, but you can see sort of they're all trying to do something like the same thing. What's your read on what's working the best here? Emily, why don't you start? - Well, I think the best advertisements now and forever are advertisements that have strong, simple visual and strong, simple language that together inspires something powerful in the viewer. I think what we're seeing right now are candidates that want to seem human and real and warm. And that's actually happening across all brown branding. I think we're having a cap-cha moment. Prove you're not a robot. And I think both parties are taking some aesthetic risks to communicate this. They're using different types of film stock and they're using different types of typography just to kind of get the point across that they are authentic and they believe in the human spirit. And I think it's interesting in the time of Trump that Democrats themselves are, they're, I would expect them to portray themselves as the serious competent alternative, right? We look at what's happening in Washington and maybe we want an adult in the room. But instead, I think we're seeing a lot of Democrats specifically go for something that's warmer and kinder and human and humorous. There's lots of humor happening in these ads. And I wasn't expecting to see that this time around. Carlos, what do you make of the populous moment and the political advertising we're seeing? Yeah, it's hard to distill the essence of the parties out of a handful of ads. But let me give it a shot, right? Like if you look at the two Democratic ads, they're both efforts at reassurance, right? Petola is saying, look, I'm not that loony left. You might be worried about, you know, like I'm NRA and the border and oil and I'm Alaska above all. And Abdullah Sayed, that addicts explicitly acknowledging the sort of criticisms and concerns that he has raised through his campaign, right, at the very beginning. And then he says, but look, but like, you know, I'm Michigan, you know, I've got these people vouching for me. If you're a little concerned about me, look at my adorable grandparents, right? They both seem to be saying, I'm safe, I'm normal, I'm of this place, I'm just like you. And therefore, you can vote for me, you know. I'm not woke one, I'm something else, right? On the Republican side, I feel they're a little bit more scattered. The Hilton ad just feels like the desperation shot at the buzzer when you're down by way more than three points actually. What's interesting to me about Sarah Huckabee Sanders and that ad, not just that it's far more substantive than any of the ones that we've talked about, as I mentioned earlier, but that, you know, she's someone who's so associated with the Trump administration, certainly the first term. And yet, you know, she seems to be creating distance from that, both ads of these ads are disregarding the Trump's request that you should vote like I'm on the ballot. You know, there's nothing about Trump being on the ballot in these ads that we've discussed. If I squint really hard, I see Sarah Huckabee Sanders kind of distancing herself from the, you know, tough guy masculinity, Hegseth vibe of the second Trump term by kind of poking fun at someone like Brad, right? And I don't have to squint at all, you know, to see the Hilton ad leaning into the sort of sexualized language of the Trump era in general, right? You know, this ad seems very risque and controversial, but when you have a president, you know, who campaigned talking about the size of, you know, Arnold Palmer's anatomy and recently talked about John Heustead's body and having a great butt or something like that, then the Hilton ad seems like less of a big deal to me, or certainly in keeping with that kind of discourse. Well, with that, thank you, Carlos. Thank you, Emily. It's been great. Thanks, it's been lovely. Good to chat. (upbeat music)