- ‹ previous
- 2286 of 2720
- next ›
Rat, Meet Sinking Ship
RAT, MEET SINKING SHIP....The New York Times reports that the McCain campaign has stopped making "hybrids," ads that are jointly sponsored by both McCain and the Republican Party. The official reason is that the law requires hybrids to promote both the presidential candidate and the rest of the party, which muddies the McCain campaign's famously laserlike messaging machine. Henry Farrell isn't buying:
While mixed messages are a significant problem, I (as an admitted naif on these issues) would have thought that getting completely swamped by your opponent's advertising is a rather bigger one. Isn't a more plausible interpretation of this decision that the RNC are finally pulling the plug on their subsidization of the McCain campaign, and the McCain folks are trying to put the best face that they can on it?
That sounds like a pretty plausible interpretation to me. After all, the RNC can read poll averages as well as the rest of us. The latest from RealClear Politics is below.
The national convention bounces for both Obama and McCain are pretty clearly shown by this data. These are inverted "V" shapes in blue (end of August) and red (beginning of September). The magnitude seems to be four points for each.
That is a satisfying graphic. I was getting a little nervous these past few days -- not that Obama would lose, but that his win would not be as decisive.
Things must be really looking good for a normally sedate Kevin to gloat so brazenly.
MrTimbo >"...that his win would not be as decisive."
I think it is going to be beyond decisive and close to, if not, awesome.
Lots of time for "bad" things to happen of course.
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
What does this really mean? It means the RNC wants to throw a big pile of money into Senate and House races, and possibly the state legislative races where the DNC has threatened to intervene.
And they will have a 2:1 advantage.
Jerome Armstrong at MyDD looked at fundraising yesterday:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/10/21/85818/503#commenttop
McCain is capped at $84m in public financing for Sept and Oct. So he also fundraises for the RNC, which finds ways to kick the money back to support the campaign, through "hybrid" ads, "party building", campaign offices, and GOTV. Jerome estimates McCain might pull another $85m for the RNC in October.
For the DNC, the situation is reversed. Obama is raking in all the money and doing the organizing at the local level. The DNC is only getting about $50m a month, but will be able to piggy-back on Obama's ground game.
The RNC has $75m cash on hand, compared to $25m for the DNC. Through October, total resources look to be $185m for the RNC (incl. $5m loan), $95m for the DNC ($20m loan), or 2:1 difference. While the RNC will have to spend more on organizing and GOTV than the DNC, that's still a large advantage that could affect close House or Senate races.
I do think everyone should pay more attention to the fact that McCain is taking public financing and Obama is the first candidate who has not. Is one way to read this article that McCain is being crippled by his campaign finance law's requirement that he not raise any money for himself, but only the RNC?
What is out there on Hon. Sen. Obama's direct assistance to the various Senate races? is there some legal bar to his doing this?
I've heard Obama is going to be steering some his warchest to the DSCC and DCCC. He's sent out a fundraising emails for Durbin and Scott Harper (IL-13) in my area this week and I imagine he's done the same all over.
Any sensible candidate runs coordinated campaigns up and down the ballot these days. I'll be phonebanking and canvassing for Dems from county board races up to Obama
in the coming weeks as I have all year. Around here GOTV is all run out of Scott Harper's office in Naperville. If you want to help go here:
http://www.scottharperforcongress.com/
Being in Illinois has it's plusses and minuses. We have a lot of people who are fired up and are not only ready to go but have been doing it for months now. Unfortunately some of our best go to IN or WI for Obama. Being the safest state for Obama and Durbin we get little of the nat'l. resources that are needed elsewhere. But we're doing great anyway and my guess is we'll have mile long coattails to boot.
It's now time for the RNC to shut down Operation: Defeat Senator Obama and start building the war chest for their four-year campaign Operation: Destroy President Obama.
McNasty is going down in flames, and I have to say that it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Given the despicable campaign this jerk has run, he deserves to be humiliated and live out the rest of his pathetic life in shame.
Don't get complacent. They can still steal it.
I subscribe to the (Murdoch-owned) DirectTV satellite service. Last night I intended to access the program guide and accidentally clicked on one of the garbage links at the bottom of the screen. Lo, there were 2 Obama campaign videos! Long ones, probably 10 minutes or so.
They're everywhere. They're in McCain's head.
Why is anyone still using RealConservativePolitics for their polling info?
Pollster.com and fivethirtyeight.com post their methodology and don't favor right-leaning polls.
AP presidential poll: All even in the homestretch
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93VM4PO0&show_article=1
How can this be? BO is CLEARLY on his way to a landslide. Why didn't the AP inform these people during the poll?
IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll: Obama's lead down from %6, now only 3.7%
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/Polls.aspx?id=309546869309178
More Damn Lies.... Ignore these polls, OBAMA owns this election
The IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll also still shows 12% undecided. This poll was also found to be the most accurate in the 2004 election.
How can 12% still NOT know that Obama is the ONLY way to go?
The point of the blog is not the poll but the sarcasm. This piece is absolutely hilarious.......if your sides weren't splitting open when you read..."laserlike messaging machine"....you missed the whole point and should have logged off immediately.
I thought Rasmussen was the most accurate in the 2004 election.