"Romney's Cold War Strategy To Defeat Obama" (BuzzFeed)

[applegrove]

Romney's Cold War Strategy To Defeat Obama

by Mackay Coppins & Zeke Miller at BuzzFeed

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/romneys-cold-war-strategy-to-defeat-obama

"SNIP...............................................

Mitt Romney has adopted what top Republicans describe as a Cold War strategy to defeat President Barack Obama: To spend him into oblivion.

As Ronald Reagan's expensive defense build up stretched the Soviet Union thin, the Romney campaign's massive ad buys are aimed as much at broadening the playing field as at persuasion, forcing Obama and his allies to spread their resources thin and to play defense in formerly safe states. Wednesday, there were early signs that the strategy is working, as Obama reported a "burn rate" far in excess of the Republican's.

“It’s just like the Cold War. They’re going to force Obama to spend himself into oblivion — while trying to peel off constituencies like the Eastern Bloc,” said a Democratic strategist, citing lingering vulnerability with blue collar workers and potential Republican gains with hispanics. “The only question is which [constituency] will be the first domino.”

As the Obama campaign launches multi-million dollar TV blitzes to shore up support in left-leaning states, Romney and his conservative allies continue to fill their war chests.

.....................................................SNIP"

[emulatorloo]

1. This is one reason why this election is going to be close.

Happily I thick that many people will see this for what it is and get angry at Romney for it.

[bluestateguy]

2. Laws of diminishing return will kick in

Yes, if they (the enemy: Romney, Inc.) spent millions and billions and all that went unanswered by Obama, then they would have the advantage and win. If one side has 1 billion and the other side only 150 million, then yes that will be a problem.

But then you get to a saturation point where simply spend, spend, spend, more, more, more will not really do any more good for you. There is a diminishing return point at which you have gotten all of the bang you can for the buck, and more bucks will not matter anymore, so long as the other side is spending an amount that keeps them competitive.

Also, Obama is the president of the United States, and has all of the incumbency advantage and with that an ability to get free media that only the president can get.

Nor have we even addressed the Moneyball strategy of spending your resources efficiently. Obama's team is doing that. The Romney team's answer is just spend, spend, spend, more, more, more. The Romney people may well be doing the Cold War strategy, thinking they are playing the role of the United States, only they may find themselves playing the role of the California Angels in the 1980s: lots of spending on pricey stars (Bobby Grich, Reggie Jackson, Rod Carew, Bob Boone), and no World Series to show for it.

This is all a complicated argument to make, and maybe I didn't phrase it very eloquently, but hopefully you can figure it out.