Summer CE Week #3: “Obama’s Big 7″
No one has ever accused the Obama campaign of lacking confidence, but there’s a difference between pouring resources into these states to “be competitive” and the likelihood of actually winning any of them. Indeed, the Obama campaign’s primary objective appears to be to force McCain to spread his resources around to defend in places he normally wouldn’t have to, though some question the wisdom of that strategy in a winner take all general election.
For example, is spending $5 million in Georgia to lose by 3 points a smarter, more effective use of resources than spending nothing and losing by 13? Theoretically, it might make sense if McCain has to spend a million or two to fend off Obama in Georgia, money that could be spent in Ohio or Michigan. But what if McCain doesn’t have to spend a dime to win Georgia?
As Sidoti suggests, Obama’s best chance is probably Virginia – especially if Tim Kaine is added to the ticket – but beyond that the odds get longer and longer as you go down the list, arranged below by Obama’s standing in the RCP Averages for each state:
Virginia
RCP Average: Obama +1.0
Last voted Democrat: 1964
Amount Obama has spent on ads*: $2,660,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $1,509,000
Indiana
RCP Average:Obama +0.5
Last voted Democrat: 1964
Amount Obama has spent on ads : $1,268,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0
North Dakota
Lead in latest poll: McCain +3
Last voted Democrat: 1964
Amount Obama has spent on ads: $157,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $71,000
North Carolina
RCP Average: McCain +3.7
Last voted Democrat: 1964
Amount Obama has spent on ads: $1,620,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0
Montana
RCP Average: McCain +5.3
Last voted Democrat: 1992
Amount Obama has spent on ads: $136,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0
Georgia
RCP Average: McCain +7.0
Last voted Democrat: 1992
Amount Obama has spent on ads: $1,824,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0
Alaska
RCP Average: McCain +7.0
Last voted Democrat: 1964
Amount Obama has spent on ads: $88,000
Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0
All told then, Obama has spent $7,753,000 on television ads in these seven states, while McCain has spent just $1,580,000 in two states – with 95.5% of that total in Virginia alone – and nothing in the other five.
So far, it’s not clear that Obama is reaping any benefit from outspending McCain roughly 5 to 1 in these states. Perhaps even the opposite. In Montana, for example, the most recent Rasmussen survey taken just last week (July 29) showed Obama dropping 5 points to McCain in one month.
In Virginia, two of three most recent polls, by Rasmussen and SurveyUSA, show Obama losing ground to McCain in the last month by 2 and 5 points, respectively. A third poll in Virginia, by the Democratic firm PPP, shows Obama’s lead unchanged.
And there’s scant evidence in the polls in Georgia and North Carolina that Obama’s spending has had much of an effect, if any, in those states.
Clearly, Obama has the financial resources to compete everywhere, and the campaign is making good on it’s promise to try and “change the map.” But I can’t help but see an echo of 2000, when Karl Rove and George Bush spent valuable time and money suggesting and/or believing places like New Jersey and California were in play. They weren’t: Bush lost New Jersey to Gore by 15.8% and California by 11.8% – and those dalliances nearly cost them the election in the end.
If Obama ends up losing a very close race by failing to capture winnable states like Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, or Michigan, his campaign will receive a tremendous amount of criticism for spending so much money, time, and effort trying to flip these seven states – if they continue the current strategy all the way through November, that is. I suspect that if they don’t start seeing more of a return on their investment soon, they’ll bow to historical reality at some point and shift the resources elsewhere.
I agree with the author of the article for the most part. Obama should not focus so much money on states that would seem to be out of his grasp. Maybe he could just focus on Virginia and Indiana out of those 7 because they seem to be the 2 states he may actually win out of the 7. Really all said and done those states pull really little weight. California holds more electoral votes alone then all of those states combined. SO it is really important for him to spend money in larger states such as California, Texas, New York, and Florida. He should also put more money into the swing states like Colorado, New Mexico, Ohio, and Michigan as the author stated, because he actually has a chance to win these. Ohio and Michigan hold a fair amount of electoral votes. Besides, it does not seem possible to win all 7 of those right wing states, after all some of them have not voted Democrat since Kennedy or Clinton. I think it would be remarkable for him to turn over any of them. If anyone says he failed to meet his goal of winning a few traditionally Republican states, these statistics showed that he tried. Obama 08′
What a waste! You know, the whole idea of spending the money is to gain popularity. What I don’t understand is, instead of spending the money to pretty much just show his face on TV, why doesn’t Obama actually use the money to do something in the state? Instead of getting on TV to say what he could do as president, he should just use the money to actually DO something to show what he is capable of. The press will follow him, and he would have no reason to actually pay to get himself out there.
Sure, plenty of people watch the news, but you have to ask the question: What are people looking for? People always love tangible products over possibly false hopes. Obama should just show what he is capable of, and if he is really capable of anything he promises, it will show in the polls.
Also, as stated above, if he were to continue with the advertising, his bets would be better off in the states where his chances could be much more solid. The point is, seven million dollars has so much more potential than just spots on television. Sure, maybe some of this could be used for advertising, to make sure his name was still out there, but overall, it is absolutely way too much.
Well, the first thing that I thought when I read this article was that Obama sure has a big pocket and a spending spree syndrome. I have to agree with this article in questioning why Obama would spend so much money–a whoppping $7,753,000!!!–on states that he doesn’t even know if he has the slightest chance on winning. Where is the fine line between spending for competition’s sake and just being stupid with where you’re pouring money down the drain? I do applaud Obama for giving an initiative in trying to “change history” with these 7 intimidatory states. However, at this point, seeing the lead that McCain already has in these states, I think that Obama should put his reservoir of money to better use. Virigina might be another story; the statistics are close enough that Obama could be a risky competitor there. Who knows? Time, history, and money will tell. Nevertheless, he should start focusing on states that would be more attainable and ultimately might decide the outcome of the election. Just like the incident with California and New Jersey in the 2000 election race, Obama should take heed of the lessons that history has to give. And sooner or later, that abundant pot of resources and money will be spent whether he likes it or not. So take a lesson from history and use your money wisely, Obama.
I think that Obama needs to focus on the winnable states because according to this he is loosing votes in certain states, like Montana, to McCain even though McCain IS NOT spending any money on adds. Obama needs to win over the states that could go either way before trying to win over states that already want to vote republican. It’s a fact that these 7 states have always voted republican, why does Obama think that this time is any different?
In theory this as a good strategy because if Obama is in these 7 states and if his votes were going up then McCain would have to come in and defend himself when before he thought that he was safe because history says so. In turn, McCain would NOT be focusing on any other states that are sitting on the fence for this election and Obama would compaign more in the fence-sitter states; but since Obama’s votes aren’t going up and, in fact, going down, then he should definitely stop focusing on these states and go for a more realistic audience.
This article states that Obama’s drive to win unwinnable states is actually making his polls drop, therefore, he just needs to take a break and focus on other states. I think that McCain has no need to worry about these 7 states because Obama is not gaining any benefits in the polls.
I still don’t fully understand why politicians have to spend so much money on campaigning. Yes, I know that they need to spend some money so that they can get their name out to the public and have better chances of winning, but honestly this article proves that spending more doesn’t always mean victory. Obama has spent 7,753,000 dollars just on seven states. You would think this would mean that he is ahead in most of them, but the reality is he is only ahead in two of the states! (and by only a minor fraction) So really, most of this money is wasted on, to be frank, annoying, repetitive commercials. How about we put this money into something that would be beneficial to the WHOLE country and better the lives of our citizens?? The candidates have been talking about how to get rid of the country’s debt. Well hmmm…. Why don’t they take the 9,333,000 dollars both the candidate spent on just seven states, and put it to good use lowering the country’s debt?? Maybe I am being a bit too harsh about this whole thing, but it sure seems like it is just a bunch of waste. To me, this is practically saying that our candidates care more about themselves then the rest of the country.
I’m with you on this one Clarin. If the candidates spent more money on more important things than advertisements, such as the country’s debt, then they are more likely to win the states over rather than advertising to them what they probably already know. Spending that much money on advertisements in that few of states is a major waste of money. The one thing that makes it really sad is that Obama thinks that he can just buy the states that he wants over to his side, but the truth is that if he would actually do something for them, it would be a lot easier to win them over. Usually states stay pretty loyal it looks. Five out of the seven states haven’t voted Democrat since 1964.
I think Obama is trying to hard to get the seven states mentioned in the article- Virginia, Indiana, North Dakota, North Carolina, Montana, Georgia, and Alaska. It is one thing to be competitive in the states to prevent your opponent from getting more votes but it is completely another to out spend him 5 to 1 in all seven states combined.
I believe Obama should look at the polls and do more in Virginia and Indiana and figure out that he shouldn’t be spending more in the other five. It should also be noted that McCain has spent nothing in five of the seven states and is leading the polls in Four of those. He hasn’t even had to spend a dime.
I think it is also necessary for Obama to focus more on States he could get like Ohio or Michigan. If he can secure these states he may be able to turn his attention to other states toward the end of the campaigning. This would allow him to pick up votes from the people that are still waiting to decide who to vote for. Focusing on states he probably has no chance in at this point in the campaign has two sides to it good and bad. trying to get a lead in these states are good but spending $7,753,000 could hinder the campaign later on.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.
Obama’s spending habits are interesting to say the least. McCain is taking more of a grounded, proven-true approach while Obama is risking quite a bit of money and resources at just the chance of a win. Most likely, Obama already has big electoral states like California in his pocket, and those electoral votes mean a lot. But the little states, the ones that most people think “don’t matter” are the ones that end up nailing the losing candidate in the end. We’ll see how things turn out, but I would not be surprised in the least bit if Obama changes his spending options in those seven traditionally Republican states. I personally feel he will give up on those states, seeing they have not voted Democrat for over 40 years. As a young Senator who will probably make more mistakes than McCain in this election, Obama needs to find his boundaries and limitations. What’s more important… spending $20 million and winning a few traditionally Republican states and getting 50 electoral votes, or spending $10 million and winning Ohio and Florida? The question is rhetorical, and that’s how I believe the Obama campaign should act. Time will tell what he does and, ultimately, who will win.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.
In response to Clarin McDonald:
I saw you at my brother’s wedding!
Anyways, I have two opinions on your statements about the national debt and such. I think the money would be put to better use by strengthening the economy and such, but to be honest politicians will always spend every cent they can to give themselves a better chance. It’s sad but true.
Plus, the national debt is in the trillions of dollars, and $10 million would probably not go towards the economy problems but instead funding some new free car program for illegal immigrants (no joke, I’ve heard about proposals of this). In any sense, I wish the politicians would spend their money on more helpful things to get votes, but they won’t. They’ll instead spend it on boring TV commercials to watch when I just want to watch my show! That’s how things just are.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.
Who gives Obama all of this money in the first place? And why would people vote for someone who wastes this much money on a losing idea. If he gets voted president can we expect him to waste our money on useless crap like this? “Is spending $5 million in Georgia to lose by 3 points a smarter, more effective use of resources than spending nothing and losing by 13?” like Chase Scott said, why not spend the money on something useful rather than on television ads. He could use it to help out some of the people in these losing states; maybe that will change their opinions about him.
Also I don’t think that spending more money will have much impact on people’s opinions. It seems like more money will just buy more television ads. If I saw a commercial once or five thousand times, I will either agree or disagree with its content. So why not just buy enough ads to where everyone will see it, and if his opinions are good, he will win the states. McCain knows this and only has to spend 0 dollars to get his opinions by. Obama could learn a thing from him.
Why is Obama trying so hard when he can see that he isn’t getting anywhere? I would have moved on to other states by now if I were him. Obviously McCain has way more supporters in at least four of those states, seeing as he doesn’t have to spend a penny in order to get their votes. All of the money that Obama is spending is just being wasted. That money could be used for much more important things, but instead Obama just decides to try too hard in seven of the fifty states, only getting the support of two of those seven. What’s the point?
Like it said in the article, there are several more states that he could try for support, but so far he hasn’t taken that opportunity. He needs to try saving up some of that money for last minute support. It’s stupid to just spend it all at one time. I learned to save up my money and not spend it all at once at a really young age. Did Obama never get that lesson? He needs to stop trying for support that he obviously isn’t going to get and go elsewhere. There’s plenty of other states out there to spend his money.
In response to James Nowak:
Who do you think gives Obama all this money? Where do every other politician, organization or candidate get their money from? Either they’re sucking us dry or they’re snitching from a treasury…Have you ever seen a politician honestly recruit money from honest means for honest reasons? Sure there are some “honest” ones out there but by the time I’m done looking I’ll need glasses. But I do agree with you when you asked, “why not spend the money on something useful rather than on television ads.” Like you said after watching the same ads once or five thousand times, I would get plain discouraged. If I was a voter in one of those states, I would be a lot more interested in a candidate who can get his hands dirty in actually doing something to help out than a candidate who looks suave on the television!
Let us begin with the fact that many children grow up to vote the same way their parents do. I am a Republican in part because my parents are. When I was 10, I was a Republican FULLY because my parents were. It is how I have been raised. Now that I am older and think fully for myself, I still choose to vote and think Republican because I believe in Christian, conservative and, what are to be considered, extremely right- winged values. Obama can not simply waltz into a “Republican” state and think that by advertising more he can convert the voters. Take Alaska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Indiana, and Virginia, for examples. The last time these states voted Democrat was way back with Johnson vs. Goldwater. Johnson won reelection. From then on, these states have voted Republican and the ideals have been handed down from generation to generation. With Georgia and Montana, they last voted Democrat in 1992 in Bill Clinton vs. George Bush Sr. If these states voted for Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton is married to Bill Clinton, in other words they are of a like mind, and Hillary Clinton LOST the nomination… hmmm… I don’t think, and obviously neither do they, that they are going to support Obama. Of the seven states I would think that Obama has the most fighting chances in Montana and Georgia because they voted democrat most recently and yet those are the two states where McCain has the biggest lead. I guess that is why I am not a political analyst. I do think it is pointless to continue spending big bucks in states where McCain is obviously going to win.
In response to James Nowak:
First of all, addressing your concern about Obama’s cash reservoir. Politicians raise a lot of money from fund-raisers. They have dinners and such things that people who share the same political interests as they do donate millions of dollars to the campaign, so the person who is actually running for the position will not have to spend a dime. Also, if you were born into or married into a rich family, you can basically blow millions and it would leave you unscathed.
And then to your point of blowing money in a state that you are losing. 3 percent is not a bad margin to lose by. And lots of people like to see politicians giving the effort that it would take to try and get elected President of the United States of America. But I do agree that seeing television ads like that would become tiresome, and people will get agitated, so he should try something with more diversity. And besides, I didn’t think that you were a “cut and runner”. Shouldn’t people try and finish what they start, even when hope is bleak.
I (almost) forgot my quote, “An old man told me, instead of spending billions on the war, we can use some of that money, in the ghetto. I know some so poor, when it rains that when they shower, screaming ‘fight the power’” (Wyclef Jean “If I Was President”).
To Renee (Because I’m supposed to respond to one classmate)
I agree with you and many of the above, in that he was spending too much money on states that were likely he was likely not to win. However, I believe he did get a pay off and that some of that money was worth something. Obama won two states, and was somewhat close on two others. That’s four out of seven that I would consider, had some significance for spending some money on. Wouldn’t you feel a little upset or possibly threatened that this young Democrat’s overconfidence and over excitement to spend money has gotten him two states you should have had in the pocket, and two others that were much closer than it should have been? It’s just a possibility, but maybe Obama’s trying to turn up the heat in the race, and show McCain that he’s not afraid of going after what he wants.
How many of you people honestly look at all those politician ads on the side of the road or listen to those comercial ads repeating how their opponent stands for all these bad things and think now I’m voting for that person. I understand that a candidate has to get their name out and make that he is ‘noticed’ by the public but $7,753,000 is a ridiculous amount, especially for only seven out of the fifty states in America. I agree with other students above who have suggested that Obama use his money in a more productive way, like show the state what he can do for them rather then just promote himself. People nowadays aren’t pursuaded by promises, they want action. This could be the reason Obama is decreasing point value with the states he has spent so much money on. I do think it would be valuable to him, to focus on other states that he could win over more easily like Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, or Michigan. Also it would be a good idea for him to not forget California which could win over quite a few electoral votes. All in all, this election has become a show-off race; who can spend more than who, or make an apearence here, etc. I also believe Obama is in the lead for this, so McCain better get started soon.
In response to Sam Fitterer:
I agree completely with Sam has said. Obama seems to be wasting alot of money in states that he will more than likely not win. He should start focusing on states that are on the line and can play a huge role in the election. If he ends up spending all of his money on states that don’t vote for him theen his spendatures were a waste and could have been used elsewhere to his advantage. Obama should continue to focus in Virginia and Indiana like Sam has said. He has a chance there. Obama needs to redirect his spending.
In response to Megan Smith
I like Megan’s point. If I were McCain I would be considerably concerned. I also like the idea of what Obama is doing. In his book The Audacity of Hope he continually brings up how if America is going to move on it has to move beyond it’s feudal struggles between democrats and republicans. If a canidate only puts time and money in states he is sure he is going to win then he is probably going to win those states and no others. In fact the states that were not campaigned for would probably be bitter and less likely to support their new president.
The author is most definately correct on this issue. Obama needs to be smarter and focus on spending money in bigger more important states (California, Texas) and others. Instead of using $7 million in small states, use them in more important ones. Obama obviously is not experienced to know that. He is too young and has not been in the roll he is long enough. Mccain on the other hand has been around the block and knows how to win this election. The media makes Obama sound a lot better than he really is. By traveling to Europe, spending $7 million on advertisments and not even leading the election, he has much to learn. I would much rather have a president that knows how to spend money than one that doesn’t. With how expensive everything is these days, we are going to need a president that knows how to handle money. If we have one that wastes it, wre are going to be in a lot of trouble. Mccain knows what he is doing. Obama needs to take notes on him.
I would have to say that Obama seems kind of oblivious to the fact that he could win over so many other states rather than those that will vote for McCain anyway. Well, it’s either that or he just wants to try to get the states he knows it would take a little time to win over. I don’t know for sure but either one seems pretty dumb to me. He either needs to pay attention or stop being greedy. Just like McCain with the republican states, Obama could have easily won over Democratic states if he had just gone to them first. Going to a Republican state is just a waste of time. Why would, all of a sudden, a republican state change their views and vote for a democrat? Things like that just doesn’t happen too often. Obama should get more realistic and start off getting the easy votes done first then work his way to the harder states, by then, he won’t have to worry about making sure he goes to all the places he needs to go, and then he can just take his time and put effort into the ones that are a lot harder to persuade.
About McCain and him beating Obama for votes, that’s not a real surprise for me, especially since he got those votes from REPUBLICAN states.
Politics are a bit too technical for me. I like to get things done the easy way. I guess you just have to be into always digging a little deeper, and that’s just not for me.
I would have to agree with both James and Clarin on this one.
For one, I don’t want to have a president that is going to be spending so much money on campaigning when they could be using it to support a better cause.
Two, how are they getting so much money in order to campaign this much anyway?
Why should these presidential candidates get so much money for campaigning when it could be used to fix roads, house the homeless, pay off the national debt, or even help sick, cancer stricken patients? What is so important about campaigning using millions of dollars?
Like what Clarin said, “spending more doesn’t always mean victory”, that is so true. Just because you have tons of money, it doesn’t mean that your the best person for the job. In the end, it’s all about if you can do the job, money should NOT be the ring leader.
Those seem like very interesting states for Obama to target. Not only are those states relatively unlikely to turn his way, many of them have very little electoral value. I know that, in any election, especially one that appears to be such a tight race, every electoral vote matters. But really? Spending $157,000 in hopes of North Dakota’s three electoral votes? Something about that just doesn’t quite make sense. Of Obama’s “Big 7” it would probably be reasonable to maintain a focus on Virginia and Indiana. He seems to have some chance of taking those states, and both states carry with them a moderately substantial number of electoral votes. In general, though, I agree with the author’s suggestion that it would be a much wiser strategy to focus on the states that are not only winnable but that also carry with them some amount of weight under the current electoral system. I think that Obama should be much more concerned about securing the 37 electoral votes available in Michigan and Ohio, states that are reasonably likely to go his way, than he should be about continuing to pour time and money into securing North Dakota’s unlikely and fairly insignificant 3 votes.
in response to Rachel Damiano
i agree fully with you when you said that Obama cannot simply win over those republican states by advertising more. But, all of the money that gets put into those states doesn’t neccessarily go into advertising. Alot of money goes into information spreading. Stuff like seminars and speeches promoting obama’s thoughts. Those kinds of things can change people’s votes because they can find that they might agree with some of Obama’s thoughts. He most likely won’t win those states, but if you read his book you’ll understand why he thinks it’s so important to put the time in for those states. He talks about going out of his way to talk to EVERYONE. Even though he knew that there was a chance of rejection, or even violent rejection. I most defenitly don’t support Obama, but he could be trying to say something by putting money into those states. (By the way, i also don’t like McCain, they are both to extremely one way or the other, i think that the president shouldn’t be a member of a party. I think that he- or she -should be represented by his- or her -opinions on each individual issue.)
This is in response to Calin:
I agree with everything you had to say. I also believe that the money that Obama is spending is a huge waste. Obama could be doing so much more with that money than just making TV ads and those weird signs that you shove into your grass or next to the road. He could be actually helping out the people that he wants votes from by doing things in their cities or towns. Even going door to door and meeting them would be better, although it may be a little dangerous since a lot of people recognize him already.
Everyone already knows his name, now he needs to put a good reputation on that name.