How does this political ad compare to that Nike ad?

The recent Nike ad featuring Paralympian basketball player Matt Scott generated lots of discussion here recently. Here's a political ad (link leads to YouTube video which is also described and embedded below) for an Oregonian candidate for Senate that has some things in common with the Nike ad: Both ads feature disabled men, both ads use disability and stereotypes of it to sell their message, both feature camera angles that highlight physical difference. Both use humor. Both feature the disability as a visual surprise at each ad's conclusion.

What do you think? Apart from what I would expect is a general preference for basketball over politics, do you like one ad more than the other? And why?

Here's an article in The Oregonian about Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Steve Novick, his campaign and how it demonstrates progress for the electability of disabled political candidates.

Description of the video from the article:

The Novick ad is a takeoff on the old TV game show "To Tell the Truth" in which three people all claim to be the same person, and it's up to a panel of celebrities to figure out who's the real one. In the ad, three tallish, handsome, buttoned-down actors claim to be Novick, then the camera pans to Novick himself -- or the tip of his head.

"I don't look like the typical politician, but I won't act like one, either," Novick says in the ad. "I will fight for the little guy."