DCCC expands ad buy to +50 (!) districts
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:40:43 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  DCCC expands ad buy to +50 (!) districts
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: DCCC expands ad buy to +50 (!) districts  (Read 2522 times)
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 22, 2008, 12:27:37 AM »

District     Incumbent     Early Buy Amt.     Early Buy Pts.
AL-02    Everett (R)-Open    $598,000    10,000
AL-05    Cramer (D)-Open    $678,000    8,000
AZ-08    Giffords (D)    $705,000    5,000
CA-04, CA-11    Doolittle (R)-Open, McNerney (D)    $2.03 M    4,650 (multiple mkts.)
FL-18, FL-21 and FL-25    Ros-Lehtinen (R), M. Diaz-Balart (R), L. Diaz-Balart (R)    1.4 M    2,400
ID-01    Sali (R)    $349,000    4,000 (multiple mkts.)
IL-10    Kirk (R)    $1.4 M    2,300
IL-11    Weller (R)-Open    $1.6 M    4,200 (multiple mkts.)
IL-14    Foster (D)    $1.02 M    2,400 (multiple mkts.)
LA-04    McCrery (R)-Open    $714,000    9,000 (multiple mkts.)
MO-06    Graves (R)    $798,000    5,600 (multiple mkts.)
MS-01    Childers (D)    $1.06 M    10,000 (multiple mkts.)
NJ-03    Saxton (R)-Open    1.7 M    3,300 (multiple mkts.)
NY-25, NY-26, NY-29    Walsh (R)-Open, Reynolds (R)-Open, Kuhl (R)    $2.7 M    20,000
WA-08    Reichert (R)    $949,000    2,425

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/07/house_democratic_campaign_arms.html

The DCCC is targeting Ros-Lehtinen. Somewhere, likely in a cramped, dank basement, HardRCafe is cackling to himself.

The CA-11 and IL-14 ad buys are questionable, too. I hope the DCCC doesn't have to spend $$$ in those districts.
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2008, 12:30:56 AM »

Do they actually think they can win AL-2
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2008, 12:32:20 AM »

WA-08    Reichert (R)    $949,000    2,425

Thank you DCCC.

XOXO Meeker
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2008, 12:33:16 AM »

Good to see they're spending in WA-08.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2008, 12:33:46 AM »

They have a 7:1 cash-on-hand advantage (55 Mio. to 8.5 Mio.) over the NRCC.
 
So why the hell not ?
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2008, 12:35:16 AM »

Do they actually think they can win AL-2
The AL-02 race is similar to the 2006 KY-02 race. In both contests, teh DCC recurited top-flight challengers who probably would've won the seats in a walk, if the races had been held 20 years ago. The DCCC is giving Bright a boost here.  But barring his opponent having a love nest with Mexican nightwalkers, Bright will likely come outpace the Democratic performance but still face short.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2008, 12:35:57 AM »

WA-08    Reichert (R)    $949,000    2,425

Thank you DCCC.

XOXO Meeker
There was no way they'd leave a top-tier race like that without air support. Wink
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2008, 12:42:00 AM »

WA-08    Reichert (R)    $949,000    2,425

Thank you DCCC.

XOXO Meeker
There was no way they'd leave a top-tier race like that without air support. Wink

My faith in the DCCC only wavered very briefly! Please forgive!
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2008, 01:15:50 AM »

They have a 7:1 cash-on-hand advantage (55 Mio. to 8.5 Mio.) over the NRCC.
 
So why the hell not ?

Because that lead is illusory and certainly not permanent.  The NRCC has already started a joint fundraising task force with the RNC.  The same kind of arrangement that got the DNC a strong shot of cash.
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2008, 02:08:44 AM »

Keep in mind this is just "reserving" time. The actually ads, if they choose to air them, come later.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2008, 08:02:58 AM »
« Edited: July 22, 2008, 10:30:38 AM by Sam Spade »

As usual, it's more important to note the races left off, as opposed to the ones included.  On my list, it is as follows:

DEM
Likely R
29. KY-02* (Lewis)
31. WY-AL* (Cubin)
32. MD-01* (Gilchrest)
33. OH-02 (Schmidt)
34. WV-02 (Capito)

GOP
Toss-up
4. PA-10 (Carney)
7. GA-08 (Marshall - maybe the Obama campaign is covering here Tongue )

Lean D
12. CT-05 (Murphy)
16. NY-20 (Gillibrand)
17. PA-11 (Kanjorski - other buys have already been made here)

Likely D
21. KS-03 (Moore)
22. MN-01 (Walz)

And now for my Watch List races that have been included...

DEM
CA-04* (Doolittle - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
FL-21 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)
FL-24 (Feeney - I may move this one up anyway, considering fundraising)
FL-25 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)

GOP
IL-14 (Foster - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
MS-01 (Childers - see above)

lol
FL-18 (Ros-Lehtinen)
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2008, 10:29:21 AM »

As usual, it's more important to note the races left off, as opposed to the ones included.  On my list, it is as follows:

DEM
Likely R
29. KY-02* (Lewis)
31. WY-AL* (Cubin)
32. MD-01* (Gilchrest)
33. OH-02 (Schmidt)
34. WV-02 (Capito)

GOP
Toss-up
4. PA-10 (Carney)
7. GA-08 (Marshall - maybe the Obama campaign is covering here Tongue )

Lean R
12. CT-05 (Murphy)
16. NY-20 (Gillibrand)
17. PA-11 (Kanjorski - other buys have already been made here)

Likely R
21. KS-03 (Moore)
22. MN-01 (Walz)

And now for my Watch List races that have been included...

DEM
CA-04* (Doolittle - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
FL-21 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)
FL-24 (Feeney - I may move this one up anyway, considering fundraising)
FL-25 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)

GOP
IL-14 (Foster - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
MS-01 (Childers - see above)

lol
FL-18 (Ros-Lehtinen)

Wait, how are you saying that districts like NY-20, PA-11, and CT-05 are lean are?  Im in NY-20 and its certainly at least lean D at this point. 
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2008, 10:31:15 AM »

That was a mental screw-up.  Interposed Rs in the place of Ds.  It happens.  Has been corrected.  Smiley
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 22, 2008, 12:19:09 PM »

As usual, it's more important to note the races left off, as opposed to the ones included.  On my list, it is as follows:

DEM
Likely R
29. KY-02* (Lewis)
31. WY-AL* (Cubin)
32. MD-01* (Gilchrest)
33. OH-02 (Schmidt)
34. WV-02 (Capito)

GOP
Toss-up
4. PA-10 (Carney)
7. GA-08 (Marshall - maybe the Obama campaign is covering here Tongue )

Lean D
12. CT-05 (Murphy)
16. NY-20 (Gillibrand)
17. PA-11 (Kanjorski - other buys have already been made here)

Likely D
21. KS-03 (Moore)
22. MN-01 (Walz)

And now for my Watch List races that have been included...

DEM
CA-04* (Doolittle - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
FL-21 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)
FL-24 (Feeney - I may move this one up anyway, considering fundraising)
FL-25 (Diaz-Balart - going fishing in Cuba)

GOP
IL-14 (Foster - this spending won't actually occur, we know)
MS-01 (Childers - see above)

lol
FL-18 (Ros-Lehtinen)
PA-10 is the most perplexing omission. Carney is a frosh in a 60% Bush district. That's not a safe place for any freshman Democrat, let alone one with a self-funder foe.

As to GA-08, I've heard rumblings that the DCCC actually hopes Marshall loses. They seem him as another John Hostettler, a mediocre fund raiser in a swing district who needs to be bailed out every two years.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 22, 2008, 12:54:49 PM »

PA-10 is the most perplexing omission. Carney is a frosh in a 60% Bush district. That's not a safe place for any freshman Democrat, let alone one with a self-funder foe.

Not to mention being in a place where it will be next-to-impossible to buy advertising in the last few weeks of the campaign unless you do it in advance.  Same thing goes with OH-02 - guess they don't believe in Wulsin having any shot.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Interesting. 

Still, why allocate money now on races where I must admit it's going to probably take a small miracle to be interesting (McClintock comes to mind, the Cubans also, especially Ros-Lehtinen (lol), though it may be hard to get advertising there in the last few weeks, though not if Obama keeps polling in FL as he has been), as opposed to a race when winning is a possibility. 

I think it's a poor decision - I mean Marshall will vote with you about half of the time - and if the 2010 environment is bad, you ignore him then, not now.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 22, 2008, 01:11:34 PM »

PA-10 is the most perplexing omission. Carney is a frosh in a 60% Bush district. That's not a safe place for any freshman Democrat, let alone one with a self-funder foe.

Not to mention being in a place where it will be next-to-impossible to buy advertising in the last few weeks of the campaign unless you do it in advance.  Same thing goes with OH-02 - guess they don't believe in Wulsin having any shot.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Interesting. 

Still, why allocate money now on races where I must admit it's going to probably take a small miracle to be interesting (McClintock comes to mind, the Cubans also, especially Ros-Lehtinen (lol), though it may be hard to get advertising there in the last few weeks, though not if Obama keeps polling in FL as he has been), as opposed to a race when winning is a possibility. 

I think it's a poor decision - I mean Marshall will vote with you about half of the time - and if the 2010 environment is bad, you ignore him then, not now.
Yeah. The DCCC must think OH-02 is done. I find that odd because Wulsin only lost by 1%, a closer showing than the ballyhooed Paul Hackett had in a lower-turnout election. I can only speculate that Wulsin antagonized the DCCC in some way. Why else would they spend dough in ID-01 (which has an even higher R+ PVI), and not in OH-02?
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 22, 2008, 01:18:04 PM »

PA-10 is the most perplexing omission. Carney is a frosh in a 60% Bush district. That's not a safe place for any freshman Democrat, let alone one with a self-funder foe.

Not to mention being in a place where it will be next-to-impossible to buy advertising in the last few weeks of the campaign unless you do it in advance.  Same thing goes with OH-02 - guess they don't believe in Wulsin having any shot.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Interesting. 

Still, why allocate money now on races where I must admit it's going to probably take a small miracle to be interesting (McClintock comes to mind, the Cubans also, especially Ros-Lehtinen (lol), though it may be hard to get advertising there in the last few weeks, though not if Obama keeps polling in FL as he has been), as opposed to a race when winning is a possibility. 

I think it's a poor decision - I mean Marshall will vote with you about half of the time - and if the 2010 environment is bad, you ignore him then, not now.
Yeah. The DCCC must think OH-02 is done. I find that odd because Wulsin only lost by 1%, a closer showing than the ballyhooed Paul Hackett had in a lower-turnout election. I can only speculate that Wulsin antagonized the DCCC in some way. Why else would they spend dough in ID-01 (which has an even higher R+ PVI), and not in OH-02?

It will be tough to beat Sali.  Not impossible, however.  Still, I'd probably place him on the same level (cross that, slightly above) Schmidt.

Schmidt isn't exactly knocking the world sideways with her fundraising, either.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 22, 2008, 07:24:55 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 22, 2008, 07:27:58 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
While I haven't met Wulsin, based on what I've gleaned from her website, I'd agree with Rothenberg's view.  I still don't understand why Wulsin, a likely "one-term wonder," is less worthy than Walt Minnick (ID-01), another likely one-term wonder.

I guess we'll have to wait till 2012 for redistricting to end Schmidt's career.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 22, 2008, 08:03:18 PM »

Yeah, I don't know. Perhaps keeping Schmidt around is valuable for Democrats as a way to demoralize Republicans and make them look bad while Sali awareness has yet to reach that level and probably never well.
Logged
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,364
Italy
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 22, 2008, 08:12:24 PM »

The DCCC is targeting Ros-Lehtinen. Somewhere, likely in a cramped, dank basement, HardRCafe is cackling to himself.

Actually an espresso bar that just jacked its prices, but otherwise exactly.

As to GA-08, I've heard rumblings that the DCCC actually hopes Marshall loses. They seem him as another John Hostettler, a mediocre fund raiser in a swing district who needs to be bailed out every two years.

Which is too bad because he's the best Democrat in the House.
Logged
Dan the Roman
liberalrepublican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,458
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 22, 2008, 09:18:37 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
While I haven't met Wulsin, based on what I've gleaned from her website, I'd agree with Rothenberg's view.  I still don't understand why Wulsin, a likely "one-term wonder," is less worthy than Walt Minnick (ID-01), another likely one-term wonder.

I guess we'll have to wait till 2012 for redistricting to end Schmidt's career.

I think Minnick would have a much better shot holding on than Wulsin. Wulsin's success is mostly attributable to Schmidt's generous suggestion that the feds store nuclear waste in her district among other things. Most people who voted for Wulsin probably have no idea who she is, and she dosen't have the profile that would let her surrive in the district.

Minnick on the other hand is a substantial figure in Idaho(or as substantial as any Democrat is). He was close to the Clintons, and was a strong recruit against Craig in 1996. While he will have a hard race, Minnick seems to have a better shot at being the next Chet Edwards than Wulsin does.

This however doesn't explain why in the post-millionaire's amendment world the DCCC is spending money on the self-funding Minnick who spent 2 million of his own money running for Senate in 1996.

A better question is what would have happened if Hackett had run in 2006 and won. I think he might actually have had a shot at ingratiating himself enough in that district to hold on. He had an interesting biography and the right issue profile to do so.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 22, 2008, 09:20:04 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
While I haven't met Wulsin, based on what I've gleaned from her website, I'd agree with Rothenberg's view.  I still don't understand why Wulsin, a likely "one-term wonder," is less worthy than Walt Minnick (ID-01), another likely one-term wonder.

I guess we'll have to wait till 2012 for redistricting to end Schmidt's career.

ID-01 was actually held by a Democrat for two terms from 1990 to 1994. 
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2008, 09:42:58 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
While I haven't met Wulsin, based on what I've gleaned from her website, I'd agree with Rothenberg's view.  I still don't understand why Wulsin, a likely "one-term wonder," is less worthy than Walt Minnick (ID-01), another likely one-term wonder.

I guess we'll have to wait till 2012 for redistricting to end Schmidt's career.

ID-01 was actually held by a Democrat for two terms from 1990 to 1994. 
That was before Idaho trended from Republican-leaning to super Republican. Democrat= environmentalist, which is a bad word in most parts of Idaho (read: anywhere other than Sun Valley, which is populated by rich carpetbaggers who think of the environment as an amenity, like a seaweed massage).
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 22, 2008, 09:50:32 PM »

Rothenberg thinks Wulsin is unimpressive and muddled in her views. Perhaps the DCCC agrees, or simply doesn't want to invest in a one-term wonder.
While I haven't met Wulsin, based on what I've gleaned from her website, I'd agree with Rothenberg's view.  I still don't understand why Wulsin, a likely "one-term wonder," is less worthy than Walt Minnick (ID-01), another likely one-term wonder.

I guess we'll have to wait till 2012 for redistricting to end Schmidt's career.

I think Minnick would have a much better shot holding on than Wulsin. Wulsin's success is mostly attributable to Schmidt's generous suggestion that the feds store nuclear waste in her district among other things. Most people who voted for Wulsin probably have no idea who she is, and she dosen't have the profile that would let her surrive in the district.

Minnick on the other hand is a substantial figure in Idaho(or as substantial as any Democrat is). He was close to the Clintons, and was a strong recruit against Craig in 1996. While he will have a hard race, Minnick seems to have a better shot at being the next Chet Edwards than Wulsin does.

This however doesn't explain why in the post-millionaire's amendment world the DCCC is spending money on the self-funding Minnick who spent 2 million of his own money running for Senate in 1996.

A better question is what would have happened if Hackett had run in 2006 and won. I think he might actually have had a shot at ingratiating himself enough in that district to hold on. He had an interesting biography and the right issue profile to do so.
Being close to the Clintons is probably why he did so poorly in 1996 -- losing by 18%. The Clinton brand there is still radioactive, even among Democrats. Chet Edwards preceded Marvin Leath, a well-liked Democratic incumbent. The  district that Edwards won had voted Democratic since its creation and his initial win was solid for an open seat race.

I doubt Minnick will break 50%, or much higher than 45%, in a POTUS year. The anti-Sali vote, like the anti-Chenoweth vote, is probably capped at 48%, which was Dan Williams' 1996 showing.

I agree with your about Hackett. If he'd ended his hissy fit about being pushed out of the Senate race and run for Congress, he likely would've won.
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 0.062 seconds with 11 queries.