With the conventions over, Labor Day behind us, and a 60-day stretch between now and Election Day, the Romney-Ryan campaign is poised to start emptying its enormous campaign coffers, investing heavily in attack ads. What's worth pausing to appreciate, however, is not just the carpet-bombing ad strategy, but where the ads will air.
Overnight, the Republican campaign released 15 new television ads, which will begin airing in eight states effective immediately. Each of the spots are catered to address the issues that are most likely to resonate in the given states. This one, for example, will air in North Carolina.
There are related ads airing in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia.
What's wrong with that list? Nothing at all; both sides agree that these are the states most likely to dictate the outcome of the presidential election.
But what's interesting about the list of targets are the states that aren't poised to be bombarded with ads: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan aren't on the list. Indeed, we also learned this week that the Karl Rove and Koch brothers' operations aren't investing in these states, either, at least as far as the presidential campaign is concerned.
In other words, the Romney campaign's goal of expanding the electoral battlefield appears to be over already.
This could, I suppose, still change if there's a sudden shift in the polls, but for now, the race will come down to same eight states we've long assumed would decide the election.
For Republicans, this isn't particularly good news. Let's say we take all of the electoral votes Obama won in 2008, shift Indiana and Nebraska's 2nd congressional district from "blue" to "red," and move the eight battleground states into the toss-up category. Let's also assume, as everyone does, that Romney/Ryan will win every state McCain/Palin won four years ago.
Where does that leave us? Obama goes into the campaign's home stretch with 247 electoral votes behind him (23 short of what he'll need to win), while Romney has 191 electoral votes lined up (79 short of his goal). As a simple matter of arithmetic, that leaves the president with more far avenues for victory.
Leave a Comment:
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan off the list? That means Rove and the Koch brothers think this game is over. One of the problems Republicans have relying exclusively on Citizens United money is once bottom line billionaires decide there is little chance for a ROI they will drop Romney like a hot rock.
That isn't all good for Democrats because the billionaires will probably shift the money into local races.
OR: They are not going to "buy votes", in those states, but will concentrate insteas on denying the vote to 'teh other'- here in PA we still have to produce an ID . (One that says we are Old White Men.)
Holy crap! Wisconsin too? Heard about Pennsylvania and Michigan yesterday and promptly ran to 270towin.com to play with the math, but I didn't realize they'd walked out on Wisconsin, too.
If these states are the battlegrounds, then they have to win Florida. Period. If Pennsylvania and Michigan are blue, there is no path to victory for them that doesn't include Florida.
Obama, by contrast has multiple paths. Ohio + any one battleground other than New Hampshire wins it. Conceding Ohio and Florida, Virginia plus North Carolina or Virginia plus any two of the other battlegrounds wins it.
Taking Wisconsin off the board makes it a lot harder for Mitt to put 270 EV's together, even with Florida. Without Wisconsin, if he takes Florida and loses Ohio, Mitt has to take every other one of these states, including Virginia and Nevada, both of which are going to be big reaches.
All of which, of course, means increasing massive resistance to judicial orders against vote suppression efforts in Ohio and Florida and a growing stench of GOP flopsweat and desperation over the next two months which will necessarily bring the ni-CLANG event horizon ever closer.
Btw, can anybody explain to me how the Romney campaign and the "outside" Superpacs and 501(c) tax scammers with which it is forbidden to coordinate always seem to be on the same page, same clock, and same schedule on stuff like this?
I shouldn't be joking about this but I love this post. It sounds like my brother-in-law trying to explain how the Phillies might still get into the playoffs.
Btw, can anybody explain to me how the Romney campaign and the "outside" Superpacs and 501(c) tax scammers with which it is forbidden to coordinate always seem to be on the same page, same clock, and same schedule on stuff like this?
Rules are for "you people." I thought "you people" must have understood at least that by now.
/snark
Its okay. If the GOP wasn't playing the role of the Phillies this year, I wouldn't have written it.
You do understand that Obama outsepnt McCain by about half a billion last time around. Why is it that when Republicans win elections they bought them but when Dems win money's not a factor?
For starters, money for Romney comes from corporate people - you know, the ones that deserve more rights than we do. Obama (in 2008) had a significant portion (Maybe half?) come from non-corporate persons (wage slaves, basically.)
That won't hold true this time around, but the incredibly vast majority of Romney's campaign money is from those who make more every year than a minimum wage family will make their entire lives. That's important. I can't buy out much more than a sandwich. Vulture Capital, inc., can buy several island nations if it wants.
I think they may be pushing more for control of Congress to keep obstructing like they have been rather than pushing for Willard.
yep!
they the GOP will just shift to lame duck mode. still obstruction and sabotaging.
Looks like a Bain Capital strategy. If you see your investment slipping towards bankruptcy, you cut your losses and start the "rendering" process. With a company you would start selling off assets.
Are there any segments of probable Republican voters that could be "sold off" to attract a larger segment of Independents voters? In other words, a re-evaluation of their "Money Game" strategy. (Loved that movie.) The only game changer I can think of would be the normalization of business relations with Cuba. Send John McCain to Cuba to cut the deal - he has experience hugging communists - I think they could sell this - and end up with more votes than they would lose.
Still there are several weeks to go - I'm still waiting for the "Obama's Secret Illegitimate Kenyan Communist Muslim Love Child" story to break on Faux Gnus.
Just remember - "down ticket" is crucial. Won't make any difference if Obama wins if we don't win it all. Take back the House, keep the Senate, kill the filibuster.
TC ... It will still make a difference. Big difference between Obama and Romney controlling the executive departments. There just wouldn't be as much potential for getting legislation through. If it comes down to priorities between taking back the House and holding the Senate, it's going to be easier to do the latter.
This is the exact arguement I've been making for months now. If you assume Obama takes what Kerry did in 04 and what Mccain took in 08 the math doesn't look good for the GOP.
wow given up on both candidates home states.
i bet their internal polling has to really suck.
"...Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan aren't on the list."
Because the voter suppression efforts are working. And the GOTP hasn't unveiled their strategy for dis-empowering the other states, but they're working hard on it!
/snark
My thoughts exactly. They don't need to spend in PA because our voter ID law will do what needs to be done for free (at least from the standpoint of money spent by the Romney campaign). I keep seeing all these polls saying that Obama has PA wrapped up, but I have been heavily involved in data entry for the Obama campaign in my suburban Philadelphia township, and in the data I have seen the "strong Romney" supporters outweigh the "strong Obama" supporters by something like 3 to 1. It keeps me awake at night wondering if those Obama supporters will even be able to vote.
I'm thinking that KR, Koch Inc, Adelson, and so on have all along not
been that keen on Romney being the Pres. Corporate profits are higher than ever
before, the stock market is back where it was prior to meltdown, the Europeans
are vigorously propping up the Euro (who knows what arm twisting went into
that?), Israel is happy with Obama (Romney??? Not so much) and for the 1%
EVERYTHING'S ROSY!!!! Why change?
Do you think the Kochs want someone like Romney screwing around with the
economy? That would be a disaster for Wall Street. Uncertainty indeed! AIG
(the first bozos to get bailed out) have rebounded so hard, the Treasury MADE 18
BILLION dollars on the deal! You and I should be so lucky when our deadbeat
brother hits us up for a bailout.
The insurance companies are of two minds about ACA. On the one hand they get a
piece of a VERY large and required pie. On the other, they have to accept some
rules to go along with it. My guess is, they are perfectly happy with the rules
for a few years ... then they can get a rules CHANGE! FABULOUS!!!!
Lord knows the R's have the $$$ to hit on WI, MI, PA. There is enough to go
around. No need to scrimp at this time. So why stop? The fix is in.
Unless you love opera, you never heard of the Koch Brothers prior to this
election. That is by design. The rich guys are buying not an election, but the
attention of the whackadoodles and the power mongers. Next go around, Todd
Akins will keep his mouth shut ... All the Todd Akinses. And the Kochs go back
into doing what they do best. Pulling strings from the dark.
Living in Florida I am now capable of instantly switching off my ears but there is one thing I have noticed. Obama ads are all over basic cable but I can't recall a single Romney ad on it; super PACs plenty but no Romney. Is their strategy simply the major networks? Younger people you would thing he wants to reach are watching USA, TNT, Syfy, etc. as much as the majors.
Romney is stuck in the 1960's. Basic cable didn't exist then. He's so retro, and not in a good way.
Romney wants to reach younger people? Not.
And given the quality of fare on basic cable as compared with the mainstream channels, outside of Bravo, basic cable is where the Democrats (i.e., people with IQs) are.
Have you checked over on gun nuts killing animals channel?
No, not Discovery. That's the "people pretending to be lost in the woods and killing animals for no good reason BECAUSE THAT FRIKKING CAMERA TEAM FOLLOWING YOU AROUND HAS PLENTY OF FOOD TO SPARE, YOU ASSH($#S!!!" channel.
Great timing... not... People in the battleground states are already sick of political ads. Obama was brilliant to plow through all that cash defining Romney, because it defined him well and got people sick of political ads. The Democrat Convention had alot of actual policy discussion, Clinton really came through. Now the Republicans are left with the impression that all they can run on is attack ads that are often misleading. The 2010 Midterm strategy won't work this time, all that deficit talk undermines Romneys plans for the huge tax cuts.
As a Canadian, my opinions will have no influence in American policies or party politics. However, because your economy is so tied to our own, and we are one of our most influential trading partners, we ARE entitled to our input.
Romney is a corporate thug and Ryan is a corporate crook and blatant opportunist. What have the Republicans done to further fiscal recovery following eight years of GWB mismanagement? NOTHING! They have blustered and balked and thrown up every procedural roadblock in existence to defeating or destroying every constructive plan put forth by Obama's Democrats.
The pointing of the Romney and Ryan fingers in derision have only succeeding in further alienating themselves and their followers from the realities of North American society, further accenting the gap between the "haves" and "have nots" among us. (I was particularly struck by the Romney advice to the woman who had lost everything to Hurricane Isaac to "Go home and phone the emergency aid number". His unfeeling inattention to the simple fact that there was no "home" left to to back to! struck as another example in futility.)
The whole GOP convention was an indictment against the whole part. The Clint Eastwood fiasco only provided the icing on the cake. So we have a super-wealthy contestant to the President whose main claim to fame has been flouting of the rules, outright lying and expanding human misery who has chosen a liar and cheat as a running mate. They deserve each other! There is no greatness to be derived from buying up businesses, milking them dry and "flipping" them for immense profit while exporting their employee bases offshore.
Refusal to divulge accurate tax returns while demanding more and more documentation from the sitting President points to Romney's total contempt for everyone except Mitt Romney. A "Successful businessman"? No. A liar and cheat? Definitely! God Help America!
Thanks for the input from the Civilized Sector of of North America, sir.
Rev. Jack,
We have an interesting country down here.
According to the Republicans, the Democrats must disarm the entire population (negating our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms) in order to force the American people to accept affordable health care, affordable education, better infrastructure and jobs that pay a living wage. Was it necessary to shoot or imprison a significant portion of the Canadian population to force their acceptance of your health care plan?
If we don't keep the military strong, muslim-black people like Barack Obama will invade and make anchor babies and take "are" jobs...
In a strange way the voter suppression laws themselves could result in contested outcomes in many of the states that have enacted them. I expect to see court challenges from disenfranchised voters even when outcomes are clear.