Priorities USA buys $9M in North Carolina TV ads
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:41:50 PM
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
  Priorities USA buys $9M in North Carolina TV ads
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Priorities USA buys $9M in North Carolina TV ads  (Read 1434 times)
dspNY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,802
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 10, 2016, 03:24:10 PM »

Hillary's PAC was in all the other 2012 swing states. Now we officially put NC in the battleground again. AZ and GA next?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/283017-pro-clinton-pac-targets-north-carolina
Logged
Rick Grimes
Rookie
**
Posts: 94


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2016, 03:25:39 PM »
« Edited: June 10, 2016, 03:29:30 PM by Rick Grimes »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2016, 03:30:24 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2016, 03:32:33 PM »

Waste of money. She doesn't need North Carolina.
Logged
dspNY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,802
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2016, 03:32:53 PM »

FYI, the other states with major ad buys from Priorities are

OH
FL
VA
CO
IA
NV
NH

Nothing in PA, WI or MI so Hillary's internal polling must be good in all 3 states
Logged
Doimper
Doctor Imperialism
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,030


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2016, 03:33:13 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

Pretty sure he was being facetious.
Logged
Rick Grimes
Rookie
**
Posts: 94


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2016, 03:42:58 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.
Logged
RJEvans
MasterRegal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 496
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2016, 04:17:20 PM »

They should get more commitments and go up in PA, GA and AZ. Or reduce their buys in NV, NV and possibly NH.  I will love to see them put a small buy in UT, KS and SD.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2016, 04:28:03 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 10, 2016, 05:03:17 PM »

It definitely pays for Democrats to invest in NC. Even if Clinton doesn't end up winning there, the gubernatorial race is definitely in play, and the senate race is potentially competitive.
Logged
Wells
MikeWells12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 10, 2016, 05:08:35 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Logged
Thunderbird is the word
Zen Lunatic
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,021


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 10, 2016, 05:12:31 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.


wait what?
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 10, 2016, 05:19:02 PM »

They should get more commitments and go up in PA, GA and AZ. Or reduce their buys in NV, NV and possibly NH.  I will love to see them put a small buy in UT, KS and SD.

I think it's good to campaign in as many places as possible because Congress is just as important as President, if not more.  I'm not sure if Hillary campaigning in Utah would actually help her though.  She might be better off just letting Utahns continue to stew over Trump until they burst.
Logged
Mehmentum
Icefire9
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,594
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 10, 2016, 05:50:11 PM »

Waste of money. She doesn't need North Carolina.
North Carolina also has a Senate and Governor's race this year, so investing in the state is more worthwhile than it seems.
Logged
Cory
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,709


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2016, 09:02:04 PM »

Waste of money. She doesn't need North Carolina.

I think the idea is that Hillary wants to win in a landslide as to establish a real governing mandate.
Logged
Tartarus Sauce
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,363
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 10, 2016, 09:11:37 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.

You must be new to electoral politics.
Logged
Rick Grimes
Rookie
**
Posts: 94


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 10, 2016, 10:16:19 PM »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.

You must be new to electoral politics.

no i am a super genius one could say and have worked on campaigns. i predicted the winner last time and in 2004 and 2008. i also pick winners and have voted for the winning candidate every year (EXCEPT for 1988!).
Logged
Tartarus Sauce
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,363
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 10, 2016, 10:34:24 PM »
« Edited: June 10, 2016, 10:36:50 PM by Tartarus Sauce »

waste of time since Clinton is already way ahead in NC. she should be focusing on battle ground states like pennsylvania, arizona, iowa, tennessee, and new jersey.

why campaign in solid blue states?

Can you post a map of your state predictions?

ok sure
http://www.270towin.com/maps/5Pjy3

PA, SD, MO, and NJ are all swing but NJ is moving away from Clinton FAST same with CO. CO alot of Sanders voters will vote Trump but Sanders would dominate there.

You must be new to electoral politics.

no i am a super genius one could say and have worked on campaigns. i predicted the winner last time and in 2004 and 2008. i also pick winners and have voted for the winning candidate every year (EXCEPT for 1988!).

A supergenius when it comes to fetching coffee for your supervisors? An industrious pioneer in filing folders in office cabinets? I don't buy that somebody with your lack of grammar skills (no capitalization, infrequent punctuation) was hired for any form of communications and outreach or that you were a primary campaign strategist considering your blatant disregard for well established data. Your map doesn't conform to the electoral trends or demographics of multiple states. What data are you drawing inferences from?
Logged
Cory
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,709


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2016, 12:18:56 AM »

If Grimes is right we will all have to bend the knee to his greatness.
Logged
This account no longer in use.
cxs018
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,282


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2016, 12:26:24 AM »

Eh. Nothing can be as bad as OC having a mostly completely normal map, and then Kentucky being flipped for no goddamn reason.
Logged
BlueSwan
blueswan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,290
Denmark


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -7.30

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2016, 01:43:21 AM »

Nothing in PA, WI or MI so Hillary's internal polling must be good in all 3 states
Not that surprised that they're ignoring WI which looks like a bad fit for Trump, but ignoring MI and especially PA seems very very strange.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2016, 01:50:08 AM »

Nothing in PA, WI or MI so Hillary's internal polling must be good in all 3 states
Not that surprised that they're ignoring WI which looks like a bad fit for Trump, but ignoring MI and especially PA seems very very strange.

It doesn't really make sense either way. Obviously they're not conceding MI/PA,  but if their internals showed them doing well there, it's highly unlikely they'd need to spend in states like NH/NV either.

My theory: Priorities doesn't actually have access to internals and is just ignoring them because they're "muh blue wall states."
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2016, 07:02:05 AM »

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-super-pac-priorities-usa-pollsters-119027

They have pollsters. Maybe they are taking nothing for granted...

http://www.wired.com/2016/06/civis-election-polling-clinton-sanders-trump/
Also read an article recently, where in 2012, they figured Michigan was closeish, but in the end, they could win without spending $
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 11, 2016, 03:06:03 PM »

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-super-pac-priorities-usa-pollsters-119027

They have pollsters. Maybe they are taking nothing for granted...

http://www.wired.com/2016/06/civis-election-polling-clinton-sanders-trump/
Also read an article recently, where in 2012, they figured Michigan was closeish, but in the end, they could win without spending $

But PA will always be more Republican friendly than MI.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 11, 2016, 09:33:12 PM »

Waste of money. She doesn't need North Carolina.

I think the idea is that Hillary wants to win in a landslide as to establish a real governing mandate.

The House will remain in the hands of the GOP and quite possibly the Senate.  Get ready for eight more years of gridlock.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« 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 0.058 seconds with 13 queries.