Pennsylvania In Play — Romney Ads Going State-wide

Thanks to “Tone Loc” for the tip, Romney ads going state-wide:

Mitt Romney is launching a statewide advertising campaign in Pennsylvania. The Republican presidential candidate is making a final-week bid to defeat President Barack Obama in territory long considered safe for Democrats. No Republican presidential candidate has carried the state in nearly a quarter century. Recent polls suggest the race there is close.

Republican officials with knowledge of the plan report that Romney’s campaign will begin running ads statewide as soon as Wednesday. The buy includes the expensive Philadelphia broadcast market, where Romney’s campaign was reluctant to invest earlier in the month. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss campaign strategy.

105 Comments

  1. stephanie
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:05 am | Permalink | Reply

    Keith, i heard a rumor that PA early voting so far shows a Romney edge, is it true?

    Stay safe!

  2. Dabrisha
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:07 am | Permalink | Reply

    Indeed, it is, but only based on 115,000 ballots…the spread is 16%+, which is better than the 2% Republican spread in 2008…again, a good start, but only 115000 ballots

    • stephanie
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:17 am | Permalink | Reply

      Thanks everybody. This is very good news!

  3. Blackcloud
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:15 am | Permalink | Reply

    Per Michael Falcone of ABC News, the Obama buy is $650K.

    • Blackcloud
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:17 am | Permalink | Reply

    • stephanie
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      Wonder how much xroads is buying in PA….

  4. stephanie
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    Foxnews.com live streame Romney’s storm relief event in kettering, OH. Now this is presidential! He sprung into action and know what is really important for those pepole affected by the storm,unlike O who sent out an email saying ” got his phone, got his back” while another email apparently asking people to man the campaign phone call centers despite thr storm. And what is the sitting prrsident doing right now? MONITORING the storm in the white house..once again, leading from behind.

    • margaret
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:42 am | Permalink | Reply

      Romney shows he is a humanitarian in actions not just words or just writing a check. Some of the stories of what he has done when the cameras are off him are very touching, such as anonymously providing large quantities of milk for a vet home or writing a will for a dying teenager. I think he’ll make a good Comforter-in-Chief for the nation.

    • Dave
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:53 am | Permalink | Reply

      A week or so ago, Romney tweeted Happy Birthday to Margret Thatcher. Would a candidate that didn’t think he was going to win (and had the #s to prove it), do that? I’m sure getting Margret’s # isn’t easy even when she’s in her 80’s? 🙂

      Given ALL the actions of the Obama camp, one can only conclude, there’s a good chance he’s in trouble….and Axelrod’s a liar. They’re probably realizing there are ‘t enough unregistered minorities and dead voters combined to make up the difference.

      • kenberthiaume
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

        that doesn’t mean he had her phone number though. But still is a nice thought, I guess.

    • Porchlight
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Permalink | Reply

      My lefty friends on Facebook are saying that these storm relief events are just campaigning in disguise. What is a good response? I said something along the lines of: he could have gone to another swing state and campaigned conventionally, but somehow raising money for storm relief is worse?

      • Dave
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

        He’s got to do something to offset Obamas inherent edge here who has to respond as the current sitting president. Any president, repub or dem, would be doing the same thing.

      • Bob
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

        They’re right – it is campaigning in disguise.

        It’s called doing well by doing good.

        What else is Romney supposed to do – sit on his thumbs?

      • Porchlight
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

        Thanks for the replies. Now they are saying that the Red Cross is claiming that Romney drive to collect supplies actively hinders relief efforts, because supplies have to be collected, sorted, organized, transported etc. They say Romney should just be trying to get money donations. I responded that I was pretty sure they’d criticize any response from Romney, no matter what it is. Crickets so far.

      • Svigor
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

        A good reply contains:

        1. It’s consistent with his character; this gives you the opportunity to contrast Hussein the community organizer with Romney the genuine political, business, and religious leader.

        2. Lefties are notoriously prone to projection; they think it’s a political move because that’s what they’d do.

        3. Lefties’ religion is politics, Romney’s religion is Christianity, and incidentally, lefties generally hate Christianity.

        Lefties are lost to us anyway; never, ever argue with them as if you want to convert them. Instead, argue for the benefit of the silent audience, the normal people who might witness you running rings around them.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      one step worse…Drudge is reporting that Obama is recommending storm victims (those without power) to go to the internet for storm relief info. Now granted apparently despite cell towns down some cell phones are still getting internet but that just seems odd.

  5. Blackcloud
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink | Reply

    I echo Dabrisha’s caution about what the absentee edge in PA wins. PA has no early voting, so the absentee ballot edge, while a positive sign for the GOP, is by no means definitive. Nearly every one in PA will vote next Tuesday. What’s worth keeping an eye on is any lingering effects from Sandy in Philly proper.

  6. Tim
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:29 am | Permalink | Reply

    Whoa! If they’re buying in Pittsburgh, they’re in deep, deep trouble.

    • Pete
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Re: Pittsburgh, I thought the same thing. Soon we’ll be treated to Trolls claiming that the Pitt buy is to flood the OH market, but that does not jibe with the Philly buy.

      • Evan3457
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

        Well, the Philly buy is obvious to hit Camden and Trenton, NJ, to shore up the battleground state of New Jersey.

        /sarcasm

      • Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

        Nicely played.

      • Pete
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

        Evans – I almost wrote the same thing about the need to target that “fluid” New Jersey market.

  7. Interested Party
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:42 am | Permalink | Reply

    I live in the Pittsburgh suburbs, and I have been saying this for weeks. R is going to take Western PA by a lot, probably 7 points. Coal and gas fracking is a big deal here–there are a ton of Fire Obama, Save Coal signs everywhere. O’s only strength is in downtown Pittsburgh–the blue collar suburbs in Beaver county and Washington county hate him. The ring suburbs like Upper St Clair and Peters in the South are going R, as are the northern suburbs like McCandless. One thing not commented on is that Rothfus is going strong against Critz with ads that tie Critz to Obama and Obamacare. We have been seeing ads about the $716 billion taken out of Medicare by Obamacare for months now. Critz ads (the few that there are) say zero about Obama. That tells you how hated he is here. Moving to eastern PA, they got hit by the hurricane, specifically around the southern Philly suburbs near the Delaware border. I suspect that most tepid voters for O will be more concerned about getting their power back on and repairing their flooded basement than voting for O. Add to that the purging of voter rolls in Philly, and there is going to be at least 100-200 K less Eastern PA voters for O. This one may be close (kind of like NC or IN for O in 2008) but there is a decent chance R pulls it out. PS–I think Casey has lost, however. he’s a bad candidate, and has run a terrible campaign.

    • xfmrman
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Interested, I am in Washington Co. and agree with your take on Presidential and PA-12 races. But I think that Tom Smith was the wrong nominee to face Bobby-Boy. We would have been better-off with Sam Rohrer. Yet, I do think that Bobby is scared.

    • Pa John
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Just to add to your voter rolls comment. There are 315,000 less RV’s than 2008. Hopefully most of them are college kids.

  8. John
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:49 am | Permalink | Reply

    Some on this blog and elsewhere have expressed concern that Obama may take advantage of the storm to demonstrate his great leadership and consensus building ability. But, for a moment lets consider hurricane preparations (or the lack thereof). The emphasis was understandably on evacuating people and ensuring widest possible dissemination of information but the Government’s seemingly total lack of proactive damage mitigation effort is amazing. The track and expected impact of this storm was basically pegged 5-6 days in advance so why were there no efforts put into sandbagging around critical infrastructure points in NYC (subway entrances, manholes, electrical plants, etc.)? The approach seemed to be we’ll just take what comes and deal with the aftermath.

    I happen to live in Omaha, NE and last year we and dozens of other cities battled the great Missouri River flood of 2011. Granted that flood took weeks to develop but the surge of coordinated government (National Guard & military) and public (volunteers from businesses and individuals) during the first week of June all came together in just 4-5 days. Millions and millions of sandbags were placed around critical electrical stations, sewage plants, airport facilities, etc. to protect them from flodding. It worked and damage to critical public infrastructure was minimal, except for some highway and bridge damage that could not be prevented.

    Unfortuantely, there seems to have been no thought given to a proactive approach for Sandy, and no attempt whatsoever to protect the critical infrastructure that is now damaged and will take days/weeks and billions of dollars to repair or replace. In the end, this storm might be realized as a massive failure of government planning rather than government to the rescue as some have feared. This was a natural disaster the nation knew was coming for 5 days an neither the feds or local authorities did much to protect the public infrastructure government is solely responsible for. In the final analysis I don’t see how this helps any politicians in the impacted are, much less the President. It should actually hurt them/him the way I see it.

    • Dave
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “It should actually hurt them/him the way I see it.’

      It could. But the question is will media raise the questions you identify — failure of gvmnt to act proactively. Gvmnts are rarely proactove especially when lots of $$$ are at stake. Can you imagine the howls of wasteful spending if Obama and Bloomberg had spent billions to protect NYC and then the stormed missed it’s target? It would not have been pretty. NYC Omaha.

      There are a couple issues at play

      1. Media – their coverage will color people’s impressions locally and around the country. It’s good Romney’s trying to offset Obamas inherent advantage here
      2. Voting – the impact of the flood in critical states in early voting. NY and NJ were already in Os camp. They were the hardest hit. VA and NC probably won’t be affected much.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:45 pm | Permalink | Reply

      storms like Katrina in which an entire city is destroyed and has no capability of handling anything is the time for the federal government to show what it can do to ASSIST state and local.

      Storms like Sandy that hit major cities that are VERY MUCH ready to handle anything that comes their way because of past storms, terrorist attacks, averaging needs of running world class cities, etc are where your Mayors and Governors get their major politicial points. People like Bloomberg, Cuomo, Christie, mayors and governors all up and down the eastern seaboard will step up and show why there were elected and do what they do. There won’t be much major role for the President and the federal government…and that is the way it should be regardless of who is in the white house or whether there is an election. Natural Disasters show us all the importance of a strong local government and being able to be self sufficient.

      Places like NYC take stuff like this like water off a ducks back and keep rollng. They don’t hide under tables in hotel rooms and nearly cry on national talk radio that “we need help damnit, help us” like the mayor of New Orleans did during Katrina. Half expected Chris Christie and Cory Book to be standing out in the rain last night yelling at the storm and demanding it go away LOL

      What will worry people like Obama is the massive loss of power across known Democrat bastions like New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania (to a minor degree) and how that could impact early voting, etc. Obama did the right thing in going back to D.C. to be at the ready, that is the job you sign up for and I applaud him for doing it.

      But I will make a prediction…if power is still out in vital areas of NYC and other strong BLUE areas by the end of this week…look for the Obama Campaign to immediately file gazillions of state and federal lawsuits demanding that early voting be extended and that if it goes into election day that polling remain open considerably longer.

      • Pensive Boomer
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

        There is no early voting in New York, other than showing up at 6 am on election day when polls open.

  9. Jim S.
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:53 am | Permalink | Reply

    Just a quick aside, Rasmussen I believe comes out with his October Party ID numbers tomorrow, the September numbers came out on the last day of September. So far we have Pew saying Even, Gallup at R+1(but stronger R support then 04′ if you include “leaners”), and Ras September at R+2.6(Oct 04 for ras was ~D+1.5 and Oct 08 was D+7.1).

    • kenberthiaume
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

      i thought ras’s daily was D+4? What do they use their party ID numbers for if not their daily tracker? I am somewhat confused.

      • Jim S.
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

        His daily is ~D+4 as far as I know. I think Ras wants to keep it fairly close for business reasons. If his Party-ID strengthens for R or holds in the R+2 or 3 range you may see him start to move it down.

  10. Pa John
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:53 am | Permalink | Reply

    Traditionally, Reps out vote Dems in absentee voting. I would really like to see a credible poll of Philly and the 4 suburban counties. They comprise 33-34% of the statewide vote. A Republican polling at 38 would be close to tied statewide. 39 a slight lead and 40 a definite win. For historical reference Bush took 36.5 and lost overall by 2.5. McCain 32.5 and lost by 10. Sen Toomey 38.2 and won by 2. The ratios work for every election.

    • kenberthiaume
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Susquehanna said Romney was almost tied in the 4 philly counties, IIRC. Probably down the usual 80-20 in Philly itself. The counties are twice as big so puts you at the high 30s…this was in a poll that had obama up 2 or so.

      If turnout is much higher in western PA due to local reasons (coal/gas) then obviously that would bode better for the rule. Just my 2 cents.
      Actually this has obama up over 80/20 in philly…10/8/2012 poll.

      Romney leads Obama in the Southwest (49-36), “T”/Central (63-27), and South Central/Harrisburg (51-39), while Obama leads Romney in the Northwest (58-39), Northeast/Lehigh Valley (53-38) and Philadelphia (86-13). Obama leads narrowly in the 4 suburban counties in the Southeast (50-45), while Romney leads narrowly in Allegheny County (51-46).

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2012/Susquehanna_PA_1008.pdf

      • Pa John
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

        That only puts Romney at 36% in SE. Within moe though. If the Allegheny County #’s are correct that’s huge. Obama won there by 100,000 in 08.

  11. Dabrisha
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 11:54 am | Permalink | Reply

    It looks like the MSM is catching up to Keith & Co.:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/30/mark_halperin_democrats_are_playing_defense_on_electoral_map.html

    Again, approach with caution given the large lead BHO started with

  12. nvClark
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Like I said yesterday it seems less and less a question of whether Romney will win, but instead a question of by how much he will win. Anyone willing to come with me as high as 350 EVs? Just kidding… kind of. The thing is that it’s getting harder and harder to maintain a sense of grounding and realism because if this race is not pretty much a dead even struggle then most if not all of the mainstream polls and pundits are wrong. And if they are all wrong and their data and predictions are all bogus (as Keith and this blog so persuasively argue) then why would it be any more surprising for the bogus polls, data, and predictions to be wrong by a lot instead of a little? I’m not very good at teasing out the exact level of bogosity in things, to me bogus is bogus. To me making a prediction about the level to which something is bogus and using that to make a prediction is no more apt to be valid then just making a prediction without the bogus data. So why couldn’t it be 350? Someone help me out and talk me down here I’m getting carried away!

    • zang
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Wow. I’ll be happy with 270 for Romney.

    • Interested Party
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This election has the fundamentals and the appearance of 1980. Looks close in the polling, but underneath there is a groundswell of discontent. When one candidate has leads among independents in double digits, and party ID has shifted sharply toward his party, that should tell you all you need to know. Just like in 1980, many pundits and pollsters are hedging their bets, so they don’t seem to off the mark next Tuesday. A few national pundits have mentioned this in passing (read the “undertow” election piece in RCP this AM), and more of them are starting to comment on it. This may have the makings of a blowout, or at least a strong win.

      • nvClark
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

        You’re not doing a very good job of talking me down. 🙂

      • stuckinmass
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

        Lots of similarities to 1980. The economy mignt even be worse now.
        I think Carter was more hated in 80 than Obama is today. And Reagan had more appeal (remember Reagan Democrats? It remains to be seen if a voting bloc of Romney Democrats emerges) so I dont think it will be the rout that 80 was. Maybe 1992 is a better comparison

      • Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

        Here’s the thing about 1980 though and Carter being more hated than Obama…I wasn’t even a thought in 1980 but from what my father has told me the media was actually objective back then. You would watch the nightly news and you had no clue if the reporter was liberal or conservative (must have been nice!). Nowadays as we all know, the media acts like Obama is Jesus Christ and simply doesn’t report on anything negative about him. I know that has to have at least some sway on people’s hatred for Obama.
        ~ Brittany

      • Svigor
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

        Brittany, you reminded me how interested I’ll be in seeing if anyone can tease a Bradley effect out of the data, post-election. I for one am predicting a “yes” on that one. America is so blatantly pro-black now that Americans have become like Soviets on the question; everybody loves the party, until they get a chance to vote it out.

    • stuckinmass
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If Romney took all the current swing states he gets 337 tops. There would have to be some big surprises. Anything can happen, but I won’t hold my breath!

      • Dave
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

        Romney gets OR. That would be a surpirse.

        Romney gets CA. That would a miracle.

      • nvClark
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

        Are you including PA as a swing state? Because if not PA’s 20 ev’s would make that 337 into 357. I agree with you that there would have to be some big surprises to get to 350. But if all the polls and pundits are either wrong or deliberately distorting things in order to make the race look even then wouldn’t that situation be one that was particularly ripe for surprises and blown expectations?

      • stuckinmass
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

        yeah I did include PA. I used 270towins map. they have PA as a swing state, but not MN

      • Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

        But I think there might be a few surprises. We see Obama unable to clear 47% in Oregon. I count 348 with the swing states all falling to Romney (Counting Minnesota and Maine’s CD2. I think Oregon and New Mexico are also in the realm of possibility. Either one switching would bring it over 350.

        I also would keep an eye on Illinois. The latest poll is from before the debates and had a small sample that likely oversampled Chicago. A prior larger poll from September right after the DNC had Obama not capable of clearing 47% in his home state. The key to Illinois is the Chicago turnout. Where will the Chicago suburbs go? It would be tight, but we saw Kirk win in 2010 there. Looking at the trends, I might expect Johnson to leech some support off of Obama there too.

        The other that may surprise is New Jersey. I don’t think it will swing, but I think it may be close. Obama’s in the low 50s with a questionable electorate model.

      • stuckinmass
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

        I was thinking of NJ as a maybe surprise too..

        I wonder if Romney’s support in the northeast isn’t stronger than the polls indicate? Are the pollster’s really studying this area or just focusing on the swing states? Romney is of the Northeast Elite, he was popular enough in MA to nearly unseat Ted Kennedy and of course become governor. There are other northeast states aren’t as Blue as MA.

        I still think they will mostly be blue, but a surprise in that area wouldn’t shock me

      • nvClark
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

        I don’t know what data this map works with or what algorithms and assumptions it uses but if you crank it up to R16 it will show a 351 ev map.
        http://unlikelyvoter.com/swingometer/electoral-college-swingometer/

    • Dave
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I guess what you’re asking is will Romey’s victory (as you are more and more likely to view it), constitute a madndate? The other questiion is what impact will Romney’s risinng tide, if there is indeed one, have on congressional races? As far as whether he wins, you’re right bogus is bogus. If he wins he wins if he loses he loses. THe degree to which it is bogus doesn’t much matter other than for the pundits and scorekeepers that make a living from providing seemingly balanced data. That’s why there’s no fear i think in the outcome among the establishment. Few pay attention to the differential in the predicted and actual results 4 years later. And people see what they want to see. So the media feed continues with their agenda and business models knowing that accountability is rarely a factor down the road. This year may be different because the media is so one sided. They’ve taken such a one-sided stand up until now. Its never over till its over but the numbers confirmed by actions of each campaign seem to suggest they know who is going to win. Perhaps, to them, it’s all about getting turnout now for congressional races. In the ideal world, Romney not only wins but wins so convinvingly and so far above what most polls predicted that it leaves lasting proof most of the polls now touted by the MSM aren’t worth the paper their written on and the left is left feeling so jaded, so betrayed in their trust of the MSM poll numbers, that they will never trust another MSM poll for at least a generation. That I would imagine is the best you could hope for.

  13. Tone Loc
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

    AP: “Romney expands ad campaign into Pennsylvania” http://apne.ws/Tsnvit

  14. Dave
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Permalink | Reply

    “Someone help me out and talk me down here I’m getting carried away!”

    Remember the Alamo…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dewey_Defeats_Truman

    • nvClark
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:38 pm | Permalink | Reply

      But doesn’t that actually buttress the idea that we could have a landslide instead of refute it? Back then the polls and pundits said Dewey would win. So convincingly that a paper actually printed the papers with that headline before the fact… Kind of like everyone saying that Obama is favored this time. I’m not sure remembering that Alamo actually makes me less enthusiastic about possible surprises, it actually makes me more so.

  15. Blackcloud
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Permalink | Reply

    The 5th and 6th are next Monday and Tuesday, i.e., the day before the election and Election Day. That strikes me as odd. Who’ll be paying attention to ads on Election Day? To me it makes more sense to start the ads Thursday or Friday and go heavy all weekend up through Monday. I’d guess they will run some ads at the end of the week. The announcement only says they’ll run ads next Monday and Tuesday; it doesn’t say they won’t run ads before that.

    • zang
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

      We may be at a point where Romney has more money than he is able to spend. I imagine the ohio tv stations are now booked solid with political commercials.

  16. Evan3457
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I wonder if Nate Silver still thinks Pennsylvania is safe for Obama because of “the polls”.

  17. wholefoodsrepublican
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

    obama’s withdrawal during this storm crisis, suggests to me that he suffers from depression, probably reactive to his impending defeat. he had such a flat affect in denver.

    he’s thin (remember for a while he got really thin)…
    he smoked/smokes (needs to tickle his dopamine receptors).

    i’m not a psychiatrist, but charles krauthammer is…wonder what he thinks?

    O just doesn’t seem to care, as richard cohen of the washington post writes about.

    • nvClark
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I don’t know about the depression thing, but that’s an interesting point about retreating to the Whitehouse to “monitor the storm”. It could be that he just wants to look presidential by using the props of office (the white house) to project gravitas. Or… well it could be that he knows the race is lost and would like to stop the grueling and demanding rally schedule but knows how bad that would look and how it might affect the senate races. So he’s using the storm as an excuse to withrdraw and take a break from campaigning in an election he knows is already lost without having to look like he’s conceding… I know I sound crazy… see why I need talking down?

      • Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

        I think it’s a welcome excuse for him to get off the trail. He looks tired and worn out. He has nothing positive to say and he knows it. He’s certainly not behaving like a winner.

      • margaret
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

        I noticed Obama has been looking rather terrible for a while, even through the debates, especially since the first one. He and his campaign have been acting like the losing side. That’s been noticed by even liberal reporters who have seen many winning and losing campaigns. In contrast, I read that Romney has become joyful and confident, even presidential. All this is anecdotal but I think the difference between campaigns and campaigners has become very noticeable to observers.

    • Dave
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink | Reply

      “he smoked/smokes”

      His face looked pretty drawn and tired at the last news conference and he’s not trying to hide his grey hair anymore. His smoking habit always concerned me..we can talk about the psychology of people who continue to smoke despite obvious health risks (he plays basketball so maybe that offsets it or he’s a light smoker). But yeah, the last time I saw him he didn’t look that great. And while I haven’t been watching the news, if he is withdrawing it probably has something to do with what they know about the election. He’s just going through the motions now. Just one more piece of evidence suggesting not all is well in Obama-world.

    • Matthew Schultz
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

      By some accounts, he’s a reserved individual. I suspect it has more to do with more personality than raw callousness.

      Either way, his personality is not terribly interesting to me. Neither is Romney’s. All politicians govern with a body of advisors. It is the interaction between them, and their general qualifications, that is critical to how someone handles the highest office.

      Back to the polling data?

      • wholefoodsrepublican
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

        disagree! the mental health of the president or a contender for the office is important… remember eagleton?

      • Matthew Schultz
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

        Certainly everyone would agree that mental health has a significant level of importance once you start approaching the extremes on the spectrum. But is Obama’s in question in any meaningful or supported manner?

    • Svigor
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:39 pm | Permalink | Reply

      The speculation about a slight-to-moderate manic depressive aspect to the zero’s personality has been going on for years now. Steve Sailer’s written about it quite a bit. He definitely seems to have strong ups and downs.

    • Svigor
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:43 pm | Permalink | Reply

      There’s also a lot of speculation that the zero isn’t going to mind being one and done all that much, once the sting to his pride wears off. He doesn’t seem to like real Americans or America very much (his wife certainly doesn’t), he isn’t a people person, being very much more an introvert than an extrovert, once you correct for his profession (pols are extroverts), and most importantly, he’s going to be the richest ex-president in American history. He’s going to make, what? A half billion on the lecture circuit over the next 10 years? Personally, I’d be pretty tempted to get that started 4 years sooner, rather than later, and I actually care about America.

  18. edtitan77
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

    This is good because it appears Florida is tightening. May need PA to offset a Florida loss.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Florida is over. It’s Romney’s.

      • stephanie
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

        I know Florida is in the bag for Romney, what i don’t understand is why he is still holding rallies here. Tomorrow night he will be in Jacksonville for a rally…hmmm.

    • zang
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Mason Dixon and Suffolk have called Florida for Romney. Even the left’s beloved Nate Silver has. The “tightening” is from pollsters who had romney down to begin with, who are now moving him to a tie or 1 point up.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Romney will win here by over 5. Tightening polls are just because of Democratic oversample. Florida will be R+ in the final tally. Not sure how much Florida will go advantage to the GOP, but it will be significant. For most media polls for Florida, swing the results by a total of 5 for the Republican. It’s looking like Romney is going to win Miami-Dade County and narrowly lose Broward while possibly winning Palm Beach County. I suspect that Romney’s victory here could be by 7-8 points.

    • Brad
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

      They also have crazy Dem heavy samples in FL like D+5 and D+8. In 2008, turnout was D+3.

  19. Dave
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I heard Texas and Missouri were tightening too. Once they stop worrying about states they thought were locked up, Obama can head to those states to try to expand the map…lol.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 6:06 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Texas tightening up? U r kidding, right? He’ll lose TX by at least 20%

  20. Steve
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’m starting to see Crossroads ads here in the second district of Maine. It is a more conservative district and Maine does split it Electorial College votes.

    • Jan
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

      How is the feel on the ground in Maine 2nd? I’m curious because we don’t hear a lot about it. Are you sensing certain enthusiasm gap or differences from 2010/2008/2004?

      • Steve
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

        It is more enthusiastic than 4 years ago. I have heard that Romney is up by 5% and I am thinking that it may be true because the Dems seem to be extra angry this cycle.

    • Brad
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Permalink | Reply

      For the first time I saw PACE ads in the Portland, OR market. I live across the Columbia in WA, but get Portland t.v. The Oregonian released a poll today with O 47 – R 41. That’s a terrible number for O in OR.

      • Brad
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

        *PAC

      • Jan
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

        I was checking for internals on that poll, but couldn’t find them unfortunately.. I did see come across some Party ID numbers for Oregon: D+9 in 2008 ánd 2010 and R+2 in 2004 are those accurate?
        Seems strange to have an equal ID in 2008 and 2010..

  21. jvnvch
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    In my opinion Romney should be considered a heavy favorite to win all states and districts lost by John McCain by less than 5% in 2008, which would include North Carolina -0.32%, Indiana -1.04%, Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district -1.19%, Florida -2.82%, and Ohio -4.59%. I rate him a slight favorite to win all states and districts lost by McCain by more than 5%, but less than 10%, which would include Virginia -6.29%, Colorado -8.95%, Iowa -9.54%, and New Hampshire -9.65%. I rate Pennsylvania, which McCain lost by -10.35%, as pretty much dead even this year.

  22. Pa John
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

    They didn’t wait long. War on coal ads airing right now.

  23. David Boette
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:19 pm | Permalink | Reply

    There was the comment about how the ad buy is particularly expensive in Philadelphia. It is also expensive for the Obama campaign to counter punch there as well. Does Team Obama have the resources to do just that?

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Means they might have to back off Ohio. But Romney has the resources.

  24. Blackcloud
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I think it’s useful to bear in mind that the Keystone State has played Lucy to the GOP’s Charlie Brown for the last twenty years. That ball gets yanked away at the last second every time.

    • Evan3457
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

      This is very true, but the coal issue gives Romney a local card to play to potentially huge advantage. The Republicans never had this to use before, but Obama’s EPA has put it on the table.

    • Brad
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:34 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Yeah, but this is first time in 20 years a sitting Dem President has had to own an economy this bad. This feels different and I really think PA is in play.

    • stuckinmass
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Is the strategy at work here to win it or to force the Obama campaign to defend it?

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

        I could be wrong, but I sense both sides have enough money.

        If R is going in, he’s going in because he thinks he can win.

  25. Tone Loc
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Here’s the Romney ad going up in PA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RWC4t4xQTas

    Quite succinct for PA audience, IMHO

    • Blackcloud
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

      It’s good for Western PA. There’s no coal industry in the Philly area, and that’s where the votes are. I suspect they’ll have a different ad running in the Philly area.

  26. SR
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

    One thing to remember: the Univ of Colorado model did predict that a Romney blowout would include Pennsylvania, and MN. Interestingly, the model expects Romney to lose Nevada. They also added New Mexico into Romney’s column. I havent seen any poll from that state.

    • Bob San Diego
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

      ABQ Journal just posted a poll – O +9 http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/10/28/politics/obama-keeps-n-m-lead-over-romney.html

      I’m not as smart as you guys about boiling down the internals, but I’ll be pretty surprised if Romney wins NM.

      I just don’t understand Nevada. Jobs have been devastated there, and that Colorado model supposedly weighs that pretty heavily.

    • Porchlight
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Heard an interview with the UC Boulder guy a couple of weeks ago. He said that the model usually predicts two states wrong. I think Obama will hold NM. If that’s true, Romney would take either PA or MN. If I had to bet right now which one, I’d say it’s MN.

      • Bob San Diego
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

        They’ve also updated it at the end of September, still before the debates (although I understand their model doesn’t consider the debates) and it was actually better for Romney.

        http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university

        “According to their updated analysis, Romney is projected to receive 330 of the total 538 Electoral College votes. President Barack Obama is expected to receive 208 votes — down five votes from their initial prediction — and short of the 270 needed to win.

        In addition to state and national unemployment rates, the authors analyzed changes in personal income from the time of the prior presidential election. Research shows that these two factors affect the major parties differently: Voters hold Democrats more responsible for unemployment rates, while Republicans are held more responsible for fluctuations in personal income.

        In an examination of other factors, the authors found that none of the following had a statistically significant effect on whether a state ultimately went for a particular candidate: The location of a party’s national convention, the home state of the vice president or the partisanship of state governors.

        The authors also provided caveats. Their model had an average error rate of five states and 28 Electoral College votes. Factors they said may affect their prediction include the timeframe of the economic data used in the study and that states very close to a 50-50 split may fall in an unexpected direction due to factors not included in the model.”

    • Svigor
      Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:47 pm | Permalink | Reply

      That’s funny, because I’ve been wondering aloud what’s wrong with Nevada for a week now. It’s one of the few “official” tossups I’m thinking Romney will lose.

  27. lotmini
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Permalink | Reply

    keep in mind that RR didnt decide just a few hrs ago to buy ads in PA and MN. This has been in the works for a while. My guess is, they have internals showing a near landslide win already.

    • Posted October 30, 2012 at 3:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

      not necessarily…the campaigns all can make a slew of new ads for tv, radio, etc in under 24 hours and when you have the money they can be on the air within hours after the approval of the ad. So this literally could have been a last minute call.

      I think talk of a landslide are borderline delusional on our part (i will happily apologize if it does happen). You don’t go from tie ballgame nationally and across all the battlegrounds to a landlside in 6 days. I still contend whomever wins this thing will do so with 285 or fewer Electoral votes.

      As a side note…of all the places Obama could “survey storm damage” where is he choosing? New Jersey tomorrow…..that seems an interesting choice…trying to get a positive republican rub from Christie?

      • lotmini
        Posted October 30, 2012 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

        I disagree that it was tied nationally a week ago. The polls have been D+5 or better and that has been a false assumption. This has been a R+ race for a while. Romney was gonna win weeks ago. It would have been closer at the end of Sept, but now it will not be close.

  28. EtaoinShrdlu
    Posted October 30, 2012 at 5:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Driving through Montgomery County on Saturday, I could count the Obama signs I saw in front of houses on one hand. Romney signs too numerous to mention. And this is a solid Democrat county. I think PA is definitely in play, and it’s going to be a photo finish either way.

  29. Posted November 2, 2012 at 11:29 pm | Permalink | Reply

    It’s going to be ending of mine day, except before end I am reading this wonderful article to increase my knowledge.

One Trackback

  1. By Battleground Pennsylvania « Blogs For Victory on October 30, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    […] From Battleground Watch, we learn that both campaigns and Crossroads Super PAC are spending money and sending resources to Pennsylvania. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: