Coincidence? The Romney "Bounce" Coincides With Massive One Week Ad Buys By Pro-Romney Groups

[TomCADem]

The mainstream media has been pushing the narrative that Romney's rise in the polls was powered entirely by his debate performance last week. Yet, as Nate Silver noted, rather than leveling off, the Romney's momentum has kind of picked up toward the end of this week even as time passed and Romney became enmeshed in his rapid fire abortion flip flops. Why? Is due to the magical momentum of his debate performance?

I think it could be due to the Republicans' recent shock and awe purchase of anti-Obama ads over the last week or so. Remember the stories about Romney and some SuperPACs hoarding huge piles of cash while President Obama steadily ran ads against Romney? Well, I guess we are seeing the results of the Republicans' gamble. They kept their powder dry and are now unleashing all of their corporate funded attacks on President Obama over the past few weeks.

The mainstream is generally disregarding this sudden burst of anti-Obama ads and is, instead, attributing Romney's movement entirely to his debate performance notwithstanding the fact that historically, debates do not really move the needle all that much. Worse, even Democrats have bought into the narrative that the movement has been due entirely to the debate.

The fact of the matter is that the pro-Romney forces are now flushing all their money into ads in the last few weeks as noted by this recent WaPo story. This means that the fight will get harder, not easier, and we should not simply wait for things to get better. So, don't buy the mainstream media narrative that Romney's movement in the polls is due to his magical, lying performance during the debate. The Pro-Romney forces are trying to buy the election right in front of your eyes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/romney-tries-to-bury-obama-in-ads/2012/10/12/b7712fdc-13c9-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html

Republican nominee Mitt Romney and his allies are banking heavily on a high-risk, high-reward media strategy in the final weeks of the campaign, hoping that burying President Obama in ads will give them a crucial edge on Election Day.
Ad purchases in the presidential race doubled or in some cases tripled last week in swing states such as Colorado, Florida, Iowa and Virginia, tracking data show. The surge is being driven by Romney and well-funded allies, who decided against running more ads earlier in the campaign in favor of a big bang at the end.

Restore Our Future, a super PAC dedicated to helping Romney, has booked $14 million worth of ads in nine states for the final week of October — more than it spent on ads during the month of September. The group is also ramping up its spending, airing a mix of ads criticizing Obama and extolling Romney in Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio and Virginia.

* * *
The ramped-up advertising by Republicans left Obama behind his GOP foes in total ad expenditures last week for the first time since the summer, though he has massive cash reserves after raising $181 million in September. Obama and his key outside ally, the Priorities USA Action super PAC, have kept up a steady barrage ads attacking Romney in Ohio and other battlegrounds.

[writes3000]

1. This occurred to me earlier today as well. I think it's spot on. The media...

Has helped create the perfect storm by piling on the President right when the avalanche of negative ads started. Obama's team has money to fight this but are they prepared and able to buy the same kind of ad space?

Really smart post.

[Cha]

2. The corporatemediawhores have done

Last edited Sat Oct 13, 2012, 05:38 AM - Edit history (1)

their best to pump up Romney since the debate ...Lying Bullies are It..doncha know.

Except when VP Biden is Agressive and then he's being the bully. See how that works?

Edit: one too many "the"

[flamingdem]

5. So it seems obvious now that they bought the media for their phoney momentum week

Did Joe save us? He's worth a billion in Ads!

[Maximumnegro]

3. And the oh so coincidental GOP poll

clusterf*ck from FL. It's a huge push. Just goes to show even they knew the odds of Obama 'winning' his debate were low based on past elections. Obama has to control the narrative now like never before. The good thing is 3 plus weeks is a long time. It's going to be tough getting the media back to criticizing Romney because the tight race gets them traffic. Time for all of us to step up and do our part. 4 rlz.

[TomCADem]

4. The Goal Was To Create Artificial Momentum. Keep Their Powder Dry

The Romney campaign took some heat for hoarding their campaign war chest while President Obama took some heat for spending money early on to define Romney. I think President Obama's move to define Romney was smart. However, the question will be to respond to the GOP's shock and awe October surprise strategy where they are apparently just shoveling millions into late election ad buys.

They key will be to expose this for what it is.

[flamingdem]

6. How do you think they might expose it?

Counter ads referring to their ads? Surrogates?

[Democat]

7. Obama's plan was great, until the debate

If Obama had looked at the debate as part of the overall strategy to define Romney, then we would be in a very different situation today.

[ProSense]

30. It explains a lot because

the debate bounce BS made no sense. Massive spending followed by a dump or RW polls.

It might be noted that some of the state polls released on Friday were from firms that have had Republican-leaning results, and they might slightly exaggerate his standing. It is unlikely, for instance, that Mr. Romney would win New Hampshire by four percentage points right now, as implied by an American Research Group poll of the state.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/oct-12-romney-debate-gains-show-staying-power/

Now that the momentum appears to be shifting back to Obama, it looks like they wasted a lot of money.

[TomCADem]

31. Reagan Looked Senile In His First Debate With Mondale...

...Reagan's debate performance had people openly questioning whether he was coherent enough to be President. Yet, you didn't see Mondale zoom up the polls. It might have something to do with Romeny and company's massive ad buys.

[ProSense]

29. You nailed it. n/t

[Floyd_Gondolli]

8. Here's the question

How much does it matter? There's a lot of good stuff in this piece, but I have read the Obama campaign locked in a bunch of ads for the closing weeks months ago at significantly cheaper rates. Several posted a story explaining that on DU with the overarching point being that by keeping their powder dry Romney would pay considerably more in the end per spot.

Clearly the Romney and GOP smear machine can afford that, but it would seem Obama will also get a lot for his money. I also have confidence in Chicago being able to micro target with ads on various platforms including TV, radio, direct mail and Internet. They've caught up a bit from 2008 in that regard but I still view Obama's operation as more sophisticated with Romney's resembling something akin to the Droid Army in Star Wars.

There is also the question of over saturation to the point of diminishing returns. That's a concern for both sides, particularly Romney. At some point it becomes noise. And people also watch TV in much different ways than they did 8 to 10 years ago with the introduction of Tivo and the DVR. I'd wager a lot of people at ground zero for these ad buys fast forward through as many of the spots as they watch.

[AverageJoe90]

9. No wonder!

TBH, I actually underestimated the power of Romney's ad-buying capabilities. This would explain his continued surge even after his debate bounce levelled out.

[bemildred]

10. Gee, who could have predicted this?

Hasn't this been the plan all along? Do you really think it's coincidence that the "bounce" and the ad war occur together?

Or are the "bounce" and the ad war part of the same ad deal? Is saying Rmoney has a bounce any different from the other lies being bandied around? No, is'd just some guy on salary reading what he is given by the boss.

[fasttense]

11. I noticed all the anti-Obama ads and said exactly that

I told my husband I don't think the debate gave Mittens a bump in the polls. I think it was all those ads.

But it is just as disheartening to know people are so easily manipulated by obviously partisan ads as they are by a corrupt media.

[TroyD]

12. The ads may be contributing, but the debate was definitely a factor n/t

[TomCADem]

19. Corporate Media Is Pushing It As Only Factor

Earlier, there was a lot of focus on the actions of Adelson, Koch and other right wing billionaires who were shoveling in record breaking amounts of money into the race. Well, here is the money being spent and concentrated in October. They are not doing it because they are stupid. They were banking on flooding the airwaves with anti-Obama ads. Yet, this flood of October money is largely ignored even though some of these groups are now spending more in a week in October than they spent for the entire month of September.

The mistake and myth is to completely discount and ignore these huge ad buys and perpetuate the myth that Romney's surge is due entirely to his debate performance. It is not. Otherwise, Mondale would have closed the gap with Reagan and Kerry would have clearly closed the gap with Dubya. The difference is the late flood of ad money.

[WI_DEM]

13. It really is the same as his primary strategy. In states like Michigan, WI & Ohio Romney began

as the underdog to Santorum but after a debate there would be a massive ad buy against Santorum and Robme would begin to rise in the polls.

[wildeyed]

14. I posted this question yesterday and kinda got shot down.

But it makes sense to me. All we heard about over the summer was the insane amount of money the Romney super PACs had raised and how they were going to start deploying it the month before the election. Now no one is talking about it, instead they are blaming the poll shift on a debate. Which doesn't make sense. It wasn't all that bad. What I remember about it, it was boring. Plus, like you say, debates don't usually make a huge difference.

We need to put the focus back on the super PACs and the fact that a few very wealthy individuals think they can buy the office of the President.

[AlinPA]

15. We knew all along that the SuperPACs would dump money into the Romney campaign at the end.

[amborin]

16. no coincidence--rove and reed

I posted this elsewhere--one week prior to the debate, they both initiated massive operations in Ohio and other swing states

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. Does Romney have any money left?

Why won't he release his September fundraising?

Was this week his Battle of the Bulge?

[amborin]

18. rove and reed

Have huge sums of money. NY times article 2 wks ago on how they were both launching ops in swing stated

[D23MIURG23]

20. This helps put things in perspective.

I was slackjawed at the way the lines were moving over at 538.com, and couldn't understand how the moderate-at-best win that Rmoney got plus the corporate media cooing resulted in that kind of change. I guess if Obama was also getting carpet bombed it isn't that surprising.

[TomCADem]

21. This Also Explains Why Romney and Co Were Keeping Their Powder Dry

...The Romney campaign was criticized for hoarding money in September and now we know why. Whether this shock and awe onslaught of advertising works remains to be seen, but we should not buy into the media narrative that the only thing at work out there is a single debate. To the contrary, right wing ads have doubled if not tripled in the last few weeks of October.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

22. Did they also successfully predict that Obama....

....would be so passive in the first debate?

[progressivebydesign]

24. "Passive" WTF? It's called Presidential. Romney acted like an angry crackhead. nt

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

26. You don't respond to an angry crackhead by saying....

...."Oh, no....go ahead, you were saying....?"

Enough of the "presidential" bullshit. Biden won the other night, and the only people whining about civility are the jackoffs on FOX. This is serious shit, Obama needs to make clear he will no longer allow Rmoney to lie.

[TomCADem]

28. ...and Reagan came off senile amd Bush came off confused and inarticulate...

Heck, in Reagan's case, folks openly wondered whether Reagan was losing it mentally. In all three cases, the incumbent clearly lost the first debate. Yet what is the difference? Romney has millions in SuperPAC support along with his own warchest being dumped into the final month.

[progressivebydesign]

23. Besides the fact that the Media is getting filthy rich from those ad buys.

I worked in TV, I KNOW how that works. I've heard the management dictating to the News people WHAT they're going to focus on.. and what they DON'T say, based on who is spending money with us.

[Waiting For Everyman]

25. That's what I've been wondering, so there it is.

The Super-Pac money is buying votes, especially I'm sure in Florida because FL is media-driven.

[truebluegreen]

27. I have had very bad thoughts about the recent (overly?) bad polls:

especially the appearance of new, very depressing polls, like Gravis...

We know Obama was well ahead in the swing states...we know, from the voter ID scams if nothing else, that the Rethugs want to steal this election...we know if there is too big a margin they can't easily steal it...

what if all these new polls and the media blitz are more of a smoke screen, to explain an Obama loss that isn't really a loss?

Those exit polls in Ohio in '04 were highly suspect, at least to me...

Someone talk me down, please.