2012 election pregame

[charmtrap]

The new 2-minute Obama ad is really pretty good. It feels a bit like a closing argument kind of an ad…which I suppose given how much early voting in swing states matters now, it kind of is:

[Rightbug]

Silver broke it down pretty well yesterday. If Romney loses Ohio he has a very narrow range of scenarios by which he could still win. He would basically have to run the table on all of the other swing states.

[Rightbug]

The new 2-minute Obama ad is really pretty good. It feels a bit like a closing argument kind of an ad…which I suppose given how much early voting in swing states matters now, it kind of is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZYI7qPO5wVw

I like that phrase he throws out there at the end – Economic Patriotism.

I was reading Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe the other day and ran across this great quote:

…There was implied a glaring deficiency on our country’s educational processes. It seemed to me that constant stressing of the individual rights and privileges of American citizenship had overshadowed the equally important truth that such individualism can be sustained only so long as the citizen accepts his full responsibility for the welfare of the nation that protects him in the exercise of these rights.

[Timex]

The new 2-minute Obama ad is really pretty good. It feels a bit like a closing argument kind of an ad…which I suppose given how much early voting in swing states matters now, it kind of is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZYI7qPO5wVw

Still leaves nuclear out of the energy plan. Derp.

[triggercut]

Or they may be doing what they should be doing – pouring more money into states that Romney will get a better ROI from, electorially.

Obama leads in Ohio by some 4 to 6 points and winning it would net Romney 18 electors. But Romney is much more competitive in Florida (with 29! electors) or North Carolina (15), so it would make sense for him to invest in those states over Ohio.

Now of course that begs the question of whether Obama is over-investing in Ohio or not… but he is in a position to do so. Obama could theoretically simply choose not to contest Florida as much and concentrate on Virginia and North Carolina while doubling down on the “leaning Dem” states like Ohio to “sandbag” his victory. Romney doesn’t have that option – he MUST run the table on all the battleground states like VA, NC, FL, and CO, so he doesn’t have as much leeway to invest in winning over states like Ohio where his disadvantage is statistically significant.

Getting outspent there in Ohio, it’s just bad strategy.

If you look at the electoral map, it’s pretty easy to see that the Romney Campaign–having already foreclosed on Michigan and Pennsylvania–has a very narrow path to victory if they also write off Ohio.

And so imagine you’re playing a wargame with a friend, and he’s got a bunch of units that he hasn’t moved out onto the board, and you’ve got a bunch of units you haven’t moved out onto the board…and you basically tell your opponent where you’re going to attack in the next 10 turns and are forced to follow through on that. What action do you expect your opponent to take based on that information? How are you expecting that to work out as far as winning the game?

[triggercut]

Still leaves nuclear out of the energy plan. Derp.

[charmtrap]

Still leaves nuclear out of the energy plan. Derp.

Expanding Nuclear Energy

President Obama and his Administration are supporting the construction of the first new nuclear power plant in decades, which will provide clean electricity for nearly 1.4 million Americans.

Over the past three years, the Obama Administration has invested in grants at more than 70 universities for research and development of nuclear technologies to improve reactor design and safety.

http://www.barackobama.com/energy-info#!/nuclear

It’s not much, but it’s something.

I do wish he’d stop with the clean coal business. I know he’s trying to win in coal-producing states, but come on…“clean coal”?

[Balasarius]

Iirc biofuels have also been shown to be little more than a big ol’ waste of water.

[Hugin]

Or they may be doing what they should be doing – pouring more money into states that Romney will get a better ROI from, electorially.

Obama leads in Ohio by some 4 to 6 points and winning it would net Romney 18 electors. But Romney is much more competitive in Florida (with 29! electors) or North Carolina (15), so it would make sense for him to invest in those states over Ohio.

Now of course that begs the question of whether Obama is over-investing in Ohio or not… but he is in a position to do so. Obama could theoretically simply choose not to contest Florida as much and concentrate on Virginia and North Carolina while doubling down on the “leaning Dem” states like Ohio to “sandbag” his victory. Romney doesn’t have that option – he MUST run the table on all the battleground states like VA, NC, FL, and CO, so he doesn’t have as much leeway to invest in winning over states like Ohio where his disadvantage is statistically significant.

It may be a pragmatic choice, but 1. Pulling out of major states considered to be swing states looks bad even if as a practical matter they aren’t really swing states any more. 2. If Romney is giving up on Ohio, he’s hoping, essentially, for the electoral equivalent of a hail mary. Maybe a hail mary with a fumblerooski in there somewhere.

[Timex]

http://www.barackobama.com/energy-info#!/nuclear

It’s not much, but it’s something.

I do wish he’d stop with the clean coal business. I know he’s trying to win in coal-producing states, but come on…“clean coal”?

I mean, I understand why he doesn’t bother pushing nuclear power. The general population, being retarded, is afraid to expand nuclear power (I think 45% favor it, and 49% oppose it currently).

Until the general population is ready to deal with our current problems, our politicians aren’t going to do anything… I just get disheartened by the fact.

[Hugin]

That chart is meant to illustrate the negligible impact of SuperPac spending, I guess. Thing is, I’m not sure that graph shows how Pacs and ad rates are not affecting the race nearly as much as it makes me wonder what in the name of Nelson Rockefeller the Romney campaign is doing, letting itself get outspent like that in a key state like Ohio. That chart may not illustrate the negligible effects of SuperPacs on the race so much as it illustrates a glaring strategic competency gap on the part of Team Romney.

I believe someone at Daily Kos was saying the Romney campaign did no ad buys for the state in October at all. So…yeah. I guess it’s the classic FLA/NC/VA/IA/CO/NV/NH/WI gambit now. Simple!

[triggercut]

I believe someone at Daily Kos was saying the Romney campaign did no ad buys for the state in October at all. So…yeah. I guess it’s the classic FLA/NC/VA/IA/CO/NV/NH/WI gambit now. Simple!

I saw that, but upon further review I don’t think the NYT story says that at all. The story refers to a specific $3.4m ad buy for Team Romney in swing states, and lists those states without including Ohio…but says in the next sentence that the $3.4m buy is part of a bigger $10m buy, which I assume does include the Buckeye State.

The NYT isn’t going to bury the lede on something like Romney pulling out of Ohio.

[Rightbug]

2. If Romney is giving up on Ohio, he’s hoping, essentially, for the electoral equivalent of a hail mary.

Perhaps with some help from the replacement Supreme Court…

/NFL humor

[Papageno]

Iirc biofuels have also been shown to be little more than a big ol’ waste of water.

Is that all biofuels, or just subsidized-corn-based ethanol?

[Tin_Wisdom]

Getting outspent there in Ohio, it’s just bad strategy.

I guess my point is that if Romney and Obama’s cash is roughly equivalent, he’s going to be outspent in a couple “key” states simply because he must fight everywhere while Obama can mass his funds where he wants to. I’m pretty sure he’d love to outspend Obama in Ohio, but in doing so he’d have to short-change Florida, Virginia or North Carolina.

If you look at the electoral map, it’s pretty easy to see that the Romney Campaign–having already foreclosed on Michigan and Pennsylvania–has a very narrow path to victory if they also write off Ohio.

I think at this point they have a narrow path to victory period.

It may be a pragmatic choice, but 1. Pulling out of major states considered to be swing states looks bad even if as a practical matter they aren’t really swing states any more. 2. If Romney is giving up on Ohio, he’s hoping, essentially, for the electoral equivalent of a hail mary. Maybe a hail mary with a fumblerooski in there somewhere.

I don’t disagree.

I’ll go with the football analogy rather than Trigger’s wargames thing because it IS September: Romney got 4th and 7 with not much time on the clock and trailing by eight points. Obama’s secondary is extremely strong and he’s covered the Romney receivers pretty well on all passing plays so far. Romney’s either got to do a Hail Mary or pull some trick play.

I think his playbook is empty and he’s sending all his receivers out in the hopes that one of them - any one - comes down with the ball before time expires so he can then go for two at the last second.

[Woolen_Horde]

Obama had unveiled his closing ad since early voting has now begun in a bunch of states. Rodney’s widow is closing fast, because votes are being cast now.

Meanwhile, Obama says BAM

[BrianRubin]

Meanwhile, Obama says BAM

Wow, that’s an amazing ad.

[ReptileHouse]

Meanwhile, Obama says BAM

Oh SNAP!

[Houngan]

Oh SNAP!

Yeah, what can Romney say in response? “Well, how do we know Obama really approved that ad? Eh, eh?”

[Telefrog]

The 47% thing is really hurting him. It will be interesting to see how the election shakes out since it seems history is going to mark the 47% footage as Romney’s downfall if he loses. Obviously, there’s a lot of other things to people that pay attention, but the film is hurting him in ways previous stuff didn’t.