Clinton allies quietly shape general-election map
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 12:14:31 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Clinton allies quietly shape general-election map
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Clinton allies quietly shape general-election map  (Read 2407 times)
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2016, 05:51:00 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Notice the contradiction there?


In 2012 it was easy, run anti-Romney ads. But what do they do in 2016? Do they run anti-Trump, anti-Cruz or combo anti-Trump/Cruz ads?  And what about Kasich? In a way, if there is uncertainty over the GOP candidate, it forces Team Clinton to diffuse the message and since voters wont know who the GOP nominee will be, it makes all the messages less salient. 

Lol.  They don't have to run the ads now.  They are buying ad time for the fall now before prices go up.  They'll make the ads during the summer.  It's not like you can only buy ad time for the same day.  It's not McDonalds.

As noted in the article, they have reserved ad time starting in June.  The GOP nominee may not be known until the third week of July. 
Logged
hurricanehink
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2016, 06:06:41 PM »

Obama started running ads in June 2012, which helped define Romney early and ramp up his negatives. What better opportunity to guarantee a wave than to convince people early and in very large numbers just who has their vote locked up for November? Say what you want about Democrats and elections, but they have a magical touch in presidential years, 2004 excepting.
Logged
Taco Truck 🚚
Schadenfreude
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 958
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2016, 06:29:29 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Notice the contradiction there?


In 2012 it was easy, run anti-Romney ads. But what do they do in 2016? Do they run anti-Trump, anti-Cruz or combo anti-Trump/Cruz ads?  And what about Kasich? In a way, if there is uncertainty over the GOP candidate, it forces Team Clinton to diffuse the message and since voters wont know who the GOP nominee will be, it makes all the messages less salient. 

Lol.  They don't have to run the ads now.  They are buying ad time for the fall now before prices go up.  They'll make the ads during the summer.  It's not like you can only buy ad time for the same day.  It's not McDonalds.

As noted in the article, they have reserved ad time starting in June.  The GOP nominee may not be known until the third week of July. 

I can assure you most of the ad buys are not going to be for one month before the Republican convention.  The article is not contradicting anything.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2016, 06:32:21 PM »

ROFL at the idea that by Atlas that MI is less competitive than Wisconsin. WI, especially with Feingold coattails, will trend D far more than MI.
Logged
Mallow
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 737
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2016, 06:32:53 PM »
« Edited: April 17, 2016, 06:37:13 PM by Mallow »


Umm... they named half the rust belt states, and then claimed the rust-belt wasn't a key region to focus on? West Virginia was already going to the Republican nominee, and Illinois and New York were already going to the Democratic nominee. So basically what they've said is "all even remotely competitive rust belt states but one (Indiana) are getting Clinton's attention," which makes the latter statement about not putting money in the rust-belt pretty perplexing.

EDIT: I think I misunderstood. I think the mention of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania was to be interpreted as states where Clinton isn't putting a lot of money yet, meaning only one rust belt state (Ohio) has her undivided attention as of yet.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2016, 07:12:00 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Notice the contradiction there?


In 2012 it was easy, run anti-Romney ads. But what do they do in 2016? Do they run anti-Trump, anti-Cruz or combo anti-Trump/Cruz ads?  And what about Kasich? In a way, if there is uncertainty over the GOP candidate, it forces Team Clinton to diffuse the message and since voters wont know who the GOP nominee will be, it makes all the messages less salient. 

Lol.  They don't have to run the ads now.  They are buying ad time for the fall now before prices go up.  They'll make the ads during the summer.  It's not like you can only buy ad time for the same day.  It's not McDonalds.

As noted in the article, they have reserved ad time starting in June.  The GOP nominee may not be known until the third week of July. 

I can assure you most of the ad buys are not going to be for one month before the Republican convention.  The article is not contradicting anything.

My point was simply that just like with Obama/Romney they are planning to start in June, but in this case they have a dilemma on what to do before the RNC (assuming an open convention) As noted elsewhere, the early anti-Romney ads were seen as effective in defining the race. I'm just curious as to what they plan on doing this time. . I don't see how this is debatable.
Logged
Stańczyk
matnnar
Rookie
**
Posts: 64


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: April 17, 2016, 07:27:36 PM »

Why isn't Hillary targeting Alaska? In 2012, it voted almost at Democratic as AZ and GA. With some well placed campaigning in Anchorage or Fairbanks it could definitely come into play...
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: April 17, 2016, 07:39:39 PM »

If she's running against Trump, she needs to contest GA, AZ, AK, IN, MO, MT, SC, MS, NC and most importantly TX.

Even with Trump, SC is not in play.  We're quite inelastic and Trump will have some appeal to Democratic whites.  The only way SC is in play is if Trump makes a third-party run, which will draw off more Republicans than Democrats, especially here in the South,
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.217 seconds with 13 queries.