Ya got me, ZEB, but I haven’t seen any poll suggesting WA is in play.
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/wa-president-12
I rewound the TIVO several times to make sure I wasn’t imagining it. Weirder things have happened, I guess.
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so!
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Rove’s SuperPac and a few others just started running Obama attack ads in WA state. I saw some last night. I can’t believe this state is in play, but maybe they know something I don’t or just need to burn some cash. [/quote]
That is mighty odd jack. If they just wanted to burn some cash why not throw the whole pile in PA? Both Crossroads and the Romney campaign have thrown money in PA over the past 10 days. If they think that state is in play why not add more funds there? Or, better yet put the money in a state like Virginia which is very close and practically a “must have” for Romney? Obama beat McCain by 57% to 40% in the state of Washington. It’s difficult for me to believe that Rove thinks that Washington’s 13 electoral votes could possibly go to Romney.
If it is true this one has me stumped.[/quote]
The governor’s race is supposedly very close here despite Obama’s lead in the polls in the presidential race. I am wondering if they are hoping for some downstream effect. Seriously, this is the first time I’ve seen presidential ads in Washington since I moved back here.
http://www.king5.com/news/politics/KING-5-Poll-Governors-race-a-dead-heat-176770651.html
[/quote]
Well, I’ve been seeing Obama campaign ads in Kansas of all places the past few days, so there you go. Kansas never goes Dem, so there’s no point of even posting one ad. I view this as just burning cash.
T-bolt has been sharing Romney endorsements from sources that endorsed Obama in 2008. So, in that spirit, another one.
…Four years ago, the Daily News endorsed Obama, seeing a historic figure whose intelligence, political skills and empathy with common folk positioned him to build on the small practical experience he would bring to the world?s toughest job. We valued Obama’s pledge to govern with bold pragmatism and bipartisanship.
The hopes of those days went unfulfilled.
Achingly slow job creation has left the U.S. with 4.3 million fewer positions than provided incomes to Americans in 2007. Half the new jobs have been part-time, lower-wage slots, a trend that has ruinously sped a hollowing of the middle class.
The official unemployment rate stands at 7.9%, marking only the second month below 8% after 43 months above that level. Worse, add people who are working part-time because they have no better choice and the rate leaps to almost 15%. Still worse, add 8 million people who have given up looking for employment and the number who are out of jobs or who are cobbling together hours to scrape by hits some 23 million people…
And another, Wisconsin State Journal which endorsed Obama in 2008.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Ya got me, ZEB, but I haven’t seen any poll suggesting WA is in play.
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/wa-president-12
I rewound the TIVO several times to make sure I wasn’t imagining it. Weirder things have happened, I guess. [/quote]
Do you live near Oregon or Idaho?
Rove isn’t pissing away money. Neither is Romney. They would be spending it on Senate seats rather than pointless states.
I get a ton of TV ads due to living near NH, but radio is different. Romney has been buying ad time in Boston Radio. This is odd.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Ya got me, ZEB, but I haven’t seen any poll suggesting WA is in play.
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/wa-president-12
I rewound the TIVO several times to make sure I wasn’t imagining it. Weirder things have happened, I guess. [/quote]
Do you live near Oregon or Idaho?
Rove isn’t pissing away money. Neither is Romney. They would be spending it on Senate seats rather than pointless states.
I get a ton of TV ads due to living near NH, but radio is different. Romney has been buying ad time in Boston Radio. This is odd. [/quote]
Maybe he now knows it is all but guaranteed and he is trying to advert partisan objection once he takes office. He knows he will win now and wants to use ad time on blue states to warm people to him so people coalesce around him and his policies. A sort of soften the blow technique and to show those states he has not ignored or forgotten them or their need to be acknowledged too despite the fact that they are states not in play.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Ya got me, ZEB, but I haven’t seen any poll suggesting WA is in play.
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/wa-president-12
I rewound the TIVO several times to make sure I wasn’t imagining it. Weirder things have happened, I guess. [/quote]
Do you live near Oregon or Idaho?
Rove isn’t pissing away money. Neither is Romney. They would be spending it on Senate seats rather than pointless states.
I get a ton of TV ads due to living near NH, but radio is different. Romney has been buying ad time in Boston Radio. This is odd. [/quote]
The ads I’ve seen were on King 5 out of Seattle.
The only info I could find about this running google searches was from the Huffington Post so take it for what it’s worth:
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Ya got me, ZEB, but I haven’t seen any poll suggesting WA is in play.
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/wa-president-12
I rewound the TIVO several times to make sure I wasn’t imagining it. Weirder things have happened, I guess. [/quote]
Do you live near Oregon or Idaho?
Rove isn’t pissing away money. Neither is Romney. They would be spending it on Senate seats rather than pointless states.
I get a ton of TV ads due to living near NH, but radio is different. Romney has been buying ad time in Boston Radio. This is odd. [/quote]
Maybe he now knows it is all but guaranteed and he is trying to advert partisan objection once he takes office. He knows he will win now and wants to use ad time on blue states to warm people to him so people coalesce around him and his policies. A sort of soften the blow technique and to show those states he has not ignored or forgotten them or their need to be acknowledged too despite the fact that they are states not in play.[/quote]
That is not a good analysis as it has never happened before in the history of Presidential campaigns. They are in it to win and win as big as they possibly can and that is that.
Zeb is right. The one and only thing the machine that is a national Campaign cares about is winning. Neither side gives a shit about the hurt feelings of the loser’s supporters or what happens after the election is over.
I’ll just drop this here…
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332371/tale-two-crises-mark-steyn
It made me laugh. Then want to have a lobotomy.
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so![/quote]
+1 to this.
Also you reach a point of diminishing returns. Living in PA, I can only imagine what people in Ohio feel like. Everyone I know has taken to just hanging up on calls, changing channels to avoid the commercials, etc and it’s only been maybe a week of ads. I doubt that more ads would really push things one way or another at this point.
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so![/quote]
+1 to this.
Also you reach a point of diminishing returns. Living in PA, I can only imagine what people in Ohio feel like. Everyone I know has taken to just hanging up on calls, changing channels to avoid the commercials, etc and it’s only been maybe a week of ads. I doubt that more ads would really push things one way or another at this point.[/quote]
But one more rally in Ohio with Mitt Romney there may have done the trick. Instead he was in PA tonight. I watched the rally on TV and was impressed with the crowd of 20,000. Yet, at the same time I wondered…why?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so![/quote]
+1 to this.
Also you reach a point of diminishing returns. Living in PA, I can only imagine what people in Ohio feel like. Everyone I know has taken to just hanging up on calls, changing channels to avoid the commercials, etc and it’s only been maybe a week of ads. I doubt that more ads would really push things one way or another at this point.[/quote]
But one more rally in Ohio with Mitt Romney there may have done the trick. Instead he was in PA tonight. I watched the rally on TV and was impressed with the crowd of 20,000. Yet, at the same time I wondered…why?[/quote]
His internal numbers must be telling him something the rest of us aren’t seeing, because Penn looks like a long shot from where most of us are standing, and Ohio is hanging by a thread.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so![/quote]
+1 to this.
Also you reach a point of diminishing returns. Living in PA, I can only imagine what people in Ohio feel like. Everyone I know has taken to just hanging up on calls, changing channels to avoid the commercials, etc and it’s only been maybe a week of ads. I doubt that more ads would really push things one way or another at this point.[/quote]
But one more rally in Ohio with Mitt Romney there may have done the trick. Instead he was in PA tonight. I watched the rally on TV and was impressed with the crowd of 20,000. Yet, at the same time I wondered…why?[/quote]
Agreed-I think the PA push is the big question in most people’s minds (as we’ve seen here)-especially given the range of situations it could stem from. Between the size of his rally and the newfound support I’m seeing around my area (granted, a red town to begin with) in terms of signs, I’d be lying if I said I was not sweating the results of this state all of a sudden…
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]CornSprint wrote:
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
I’ve read that there is only so much air time available for purchase. So at some point, money gets “wasted” in low leverage situations just because the money needs to be spent. I personally have no idea how valid that might be, I’m just regurgitating.
edit to add: I saw an Obama attack ad (from a PAC) on late night TV and I’m in CA, so![/quote]
+1 to this.
Also you reach a point of diminishing returns. Living in PA, I can only imagine what people in Ohio feel like. Everyone I know has taken to just hanging up on calls, changing channels to avoid the commercials, etc and it’s only been maybe a week of ads. I doubt that more ads would really push things one way or another at this point.[/quote]
But one more rally in Ohio with Mitt Romney there may have done the trick. Instead he was in PA tonight. I watched the rally on TV and was impressed with the crowd of 20,000. Yet, at the same time I wondered…why?[/quote]
Agreed-I think the PA push is the big question in most people’s minds (as we’ve seen here)-especially given the range of situations it could stem from. Between the size of his rally and the newfound support I’m seeing around my area (granted, a red town to begin with) in terms of signs, I’d be lying if I said I was not sweating the results of this state all of a sudden…[/quote]
If PA goes to Romney, it’s exceedingly likely that Ohio and Iowa and Florida and etc.–which have been much closer throughout the entire race–already have.
I say this because there has probably been enough polling throughout the swing states at this point to be reasonably confident of their positions relative to each other. Now, Mufasa and company may well be right and enthusiasm may tip the vote in Romney’s direction–thereby negating the consensus of the vast majority of swing state polls–but that phenomenon will probably be fairly monolithic rather than a localized event within particular states. In other words, that tide will lift all boats without affecting their positions relative to each other.
First of all you cannot look at any of the swing state polls and claim they matter all that much to either side. 1 to 2 pts. in a state poll mean nothing. Keep in mind the margin of error in even a well run poll is 2-3 pts. So when someone is up by a point or two I’m not impressed. I’d much rather have the intensity of voter turn out as we’ve seen for Mitt Romney in early voting (as compared to the early turnout for Obama in 08’ it was immense). Nationally every pollster that has any credibility at all has the race a dead heat.
Does Mitt know something that we don’t? Other than how to make 300 million bucks in the private sector. (dang I’d rather know how to do that than win an election) Anyway, I think he does. There is no way a smart guy like Romney (love him or hate him he’s bright) will walk away from Ohio and Wisconsin and campaign in PA, unless, he knows he has one or both of them won and he is pouring it on, or looking for insurance in a worst case scenario. The argument that Axlerod makes “this is desperation on Romney’s part” does not hold water. If he was desperate why would he leave two states where he has been working hard and that are seemingly very close and take a gamble on PA? That is not what a smart business man does.
I will go out on a limb and say that HE TIHNKS that he has at least one of the two, either Ohio or Wisconsin, or both of them in the bag. And now he’s shopping for insurance and a greater victory on Tuesday.
Quite honestly this has been a very exicting election to watch. In many ways it reminds me of 2000. But I have a distinct feeling it will be over much faster…either way.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m seeing a lot of cocky talk from the Dems, and numbers spinning from the repubs…
I think O is gonna take this still.
Oh well, it was a good run, and exciting while it lasted…
Christie 2016![/quote]
If Romney does lose and Christie is the nominee I will work against him. He deserves the same loyalty that he gave to Romney.[/quote]
I keep trying to catch up with some of these threads but just do not have the time to keep up with you guys.
I will work against Christie, too, if he thinks he’s going to try and run for Pres after his backstabbing and bootlicking. Asshole.
While I do think Romney and Ryan still have this in the bag, if not, Mark Rubio 2016!
Again…the only thing that I am sure of is that NEITHER man will win with a great mandate from the American people. We will be as divided as ever.
With that being said; I am still in the camp that feels that this election will not be as close as many think. It will not be a landslide by any means…but I think that we will be able to go to bed at a reasonable hour knowing who won.
I still think that will be Romney.
We’ll see.
Mufasa
By the way…
There will be NO “Pregnant/Hanging” chads to deal with…
With the exception of some VERY small voting districts…the punch cards have been eliminated (at great expense, but I think well worth the cost).
Mufasa