Today's installment of campaign-related news items that won't necessarily generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:
* The new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows President Obama leading Mitt Romney by six points nationwide, 49% to 43%, while the latest PPP poll for Daily Kos/SEIU shows the two tied at 46% each.
* The Priorities USA Action super PAC has a good new ad going after Romney's offshore record and connecting it to the Olympics. The spot is set to run in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia during the summer games.
* A new PPP poll in Michigan shows Obama leading Romney by 14 points, 53% to 39%. In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, PPP shows the president up, but by a smaller margin, 49% to 43%.
* In Massachusetts, a new poll conducted by the MassINC Polling Group shows Elizabeth Warren (D) with a narrow lead over incumbent Sen. Scott Brown (R), 40% to 38%.
* Am amazing number: "Republican-aligned super PACs and other outside conservative groups have spent more than $144 million on general election ads in swing presidential states." That figure will continue to soar over the next few months.
* In New York, a new Quinnipiac poll shows Obama leading Romney by a whopping 23 points, 55% to 32%.
* The same poll shows New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) with an incredible 73% approval rating, though his constituents are not yet sold on his presidential prospects in 2016.
* And in Wisconsin, Democratic control of the state Senate got more complicated when a disgruntled Dem, unhappy with his committee assignment, said he doesn't want to caucus with his party anymore.
Leave a Comment:
Wonder how many jobs could have been created with $144M + more MM to come? Folks should ask the question: "Why are those corporate persons willing to spend mega mega bucks to elect a lying SackOCrap as President, but not willing to create jobs?"
Well I can't speak to the job creation. But they want Romney (the lying SackOCrap as you put it) to replace the lyin sack of crap we already have.
My fear is that is that when Obama wins the SuperPACs will say "See , Citizens United is no big deal" and next time they'll raise and spend even more to try and buy the election. I think that if we continue to allow unlimited spending, we should count up all the money raised and each party gets 1 electoral college vote per million added to their total electoral college votes. BUT, all the money collected will have to be donated to programs helping the underprivileged. Maybe that would even things out a bit. Progressives would give a little more because they'd be helping someone out if they gave, and conservatives would give less because they'd be helping someone out if they gave. What do you think?
Wow, that commercial rocks! What a burn... And hey David James, your spelling is improving or declining depending on which order anyone reads your comments, congratulations!
That's a great ad. I would also like to see Obama run some ads addressing the $1+ billion in federal earmarks for infranstructure and other 2002 Olympics Games costs, not to mention the $350 million in grants provided by the government.
Romney's best skill was apparently in lobbying Washington for bailout money for this little venture. The facts belie the 'I did it all by myself" theme that Mitt is so fond of foisting off on uninformed voters.
To the extent that the 2002 Olympics were successful, we taxpayers had a lot to do with it.
No comments on Joe Scarborough's idiotic statement about Autism and his lame apology! He is Nucking Futs!
When I tried to view the Olympics ad, I got a "This video is private" message. Huh?