Obama's Ads
| Sun Oct. 12, 2008 10:52 PM PDT
OBAMA'S ADS....Politico reports on Barack Obama's fundraising:
One official close to the campaign said that September's fundraising haul set a new record, surpassing the $66 million Obama raised in August. Another aide, asked about the campaign's take, would only describe it: "big."
How big is "big"? Well, big enough that I've actually seen a few Obama ads myself. In California. I guess maybe they were national ad buys, but I don't think so. And I can hardly remember the last time I saw a presidential campaign bothering to advertise in California. (Maybe for a few days in 2000 when Karl Rove was having delusions that Bush might win here? That's all that comes to mind.)
Anyway, I don't quite know what this means, but Obama must really have money to burn if he's buying ads here in the Golden State.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
I, too, live in California. San Francisco, to be more specific. And I've also seen his ads, especially over this weekend on regular cable. Lots of ads during the NBA exhibition game, and even some during the NFL games today, I think.
And it's surely a national buy - I don't think he'd be wasting money in Gavin Newsom country.
I'm thinking they have to be national buys too. I've finally started seeing Obama ads this last week up in Spokane, WA.
National ad buys this point are probably like his 30 minute prime time buys, meant to boost Democratic turnout everywhere.
Submitted by Legacy on Sun Oct. 12, 2008 11:33 PM PDT.
OK, I guess they might have been national. One of the ads I saw was during a football game today, and I figured that one might be national. The others I've seen didn't seem like they were. But of course there's no way to know for sure.
Indeed, I saw Obama adverts in Connecticut yesterday during the football games. Presidential candidates never advertise in CT, unless its the last week and they are supporting congressional races.
National buys on sporting events make a lot of sense, but must be expensive. Obama's support still lags behind with white males, but the logic of his message should be persuasive. The ads are all about taxes, contrasting the McCain and Obama plans, full of references to where a curious NFL fan can look up his positions. Its a better strategy than slogans or emotions, at this point.
I don't know how ads are bought, and Patriots football as well as BoSox Baseball could be considered somewhat national audiences, but I saw an average of nearly one Obama ad each commercial break on Springfield, Massachusetts based network affiliates. It was as new for me to see in the Commonwealth as it probably was for you.
Here in Northern Virginia, we are getting flooded with ads - as you might expect.
For the longest time, most of the ads were McCain's but now they are almost all Obama.
Anecdotal entirely - but there are far more Obama signs around than I have ever seen for another candidate for either party. Most startling is that I've seen a large number of home-made signs in addition to the standard plastic campaign issued ones. Those home-made signs are impressive because they are big and each one suggests that someone was willing to put in the time to make the sign and put it up - rather than just agree to have a campaign worker put it up in the yard. Several local politicians Republics here have recently quit the party. I will be surprised if NoVA doesn't go for Obama in an overwhelming landslide.
"...Anyway, I don't quite know what this means, but Obama must really have money to burn if he's buying ads here in the Golden State."
Good. Maybe he can reimburse me for the button order that got lost in postal limbo, as well as the replacement order of buttons that hasn't arrived yet.
An Iraqi vet is running anti Obama ads in LA. The notable part is taking an Obama quote from one of the debates out of context. The Obama ads I've seen have all been connected to sports (go Dodgers!)and have been about as amateurish at the vet's.
The swings states get all the good ads.
Submitted by Joe Klein's conscience (not verified) on Mon Oct. 13, 2008 7:47 AM PDT.
While I live in a "swing state", I bet the CA are national buys. Also, it is obvious that Obama wants to ground McCain into the dirt. Remember how Dubya actually got the most votes ever four years ago(While also receiving the most votes against)? I think Obama wants to smash that record as well(Meaning the most votes for). And part of that means running up the totals in Democratic friendly states.
Just got back from Austin, TX, and I saw the same Obama ad run during the football game. Even though Austin is "librul" the ad must have been part of the national buy we're all talking about. Still. Seeing an Obama ad while traveling through McCain/Palin country brought a smile to my face.
I think David, above, is right. I remember very early on Obama talking about how he intended to use his campaign to boost Democrats nationally. He seems really to be positioning himself to be THE leader of a nationally strong Democratic party, not just president.
Submitted by Carl Nyberg (not verified) on Mon Oct. 13, 2008 8:43 AM PDT.
I watch little enough TV that I can't recall seeing a commercial for any of the Chicago area U.S. House races. But I have heard a couple commercials for Obama playing in the background.
Illinois isn't being contested.
I think there must be some sort of calculation that buying TV ads either helps with fundraising, buzz or down-ballot races.
As Markos says, he wants to crush the spirit of the GOP so they can see no viable comeback for a decade or more.
If you are buying enough local advertising, at some point it becomes cheaper to just do a national ad buy. (To be clear, I don't know if this is the Obama campaign's calculus. )
The argument for making national buys might be more compelling if you're hoping to get some spillover benefit on downticket races in non-swing states. (My recollection is that under federal election law, the Obama campaign can't just donate money to those downticket campaigns.)
Also, you don't get points for having a lot of money left in the bank on November 5, so you might as well spend it, and there is no more time-efficient way to spend money at this point than advertising. You might say, I wish I could go back in time and open some North Dakota field offices, but it's too late to do that. Ad buys are the best use of the money.
One other reason why he might advertise in the bluest areas: his campaign has received an enormous amount of financial support from small donors in those areas. It wouldn't surprise me if they've figured that showing some ads in those areas will increase donations enough to more than offset the cost.
I've been seeing a lot of Obama ads in Austin, Texas, during Letterman and Craig Ferguson talk shows but I think I've seen them in prime time, too. It's the one talking about McCain's health tax increase and it probably is part of a national buy, but good on him for taking the fight across the country.
I've been seeing frequent ads in the NYC suburban area, and Dems usually don't bother to advertise much here in Presidential elections. I've been wondering if they are trying to run the table so they can claim a mandate by rolling up big margins wherever they can. Given how vicious the Republicans were during the Clinton years, they may be trying for some degree of preemptive intimidation by winning big.
I live in northern NJ, within the NY media market, and there have been a slew of Obama ads lately. None of the tri-states - NJ, NY and Connecticut - are close to being battleground, so if Obama's spending here, my guess is that he has a slew of cash at hand.
Yesterday I picked up about a 2 week accumulation of mail. There were about 10 mailers from the DNC or Obama, 1 from a local state GOP legislator, & NONE from Mc Cain or the RNC. That tells me Mc Cain is really short on cash in comparison.
Works for me!
I was wondering if Obama's fundraising would slow down due to all that stock market/economy crap that started going berserk starting mid September. Amazing it hasn't impacted Obama's fundraising efforts. Wonder how McCain is faring.
