Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Joe BidenCongratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
 

brooklynite

(94,780 posts)
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:43 PM Dec 2019

Mike Bloomberg Closes In On $100M In Campaign Ad Spending

Ad Age

If we had to come up with an all-purpose tagline for the current crop of presidential candidates, we’d lean toward “A fat lot of good it did her”/“A fat lot of good it did him.” Sooner or later, of course, it will apply to all but one of them.

But for now it certainly works for Senator Kamala Harris, whose campaign blew through nearly $600,000 on TV and radio ads, according to the latest Ad Age Datacenter analysis of political ad spending in partnership with Kantar/CMAG—plus $2.3 million on Facebook ads, according to the social network’s own accounting. Harris suspended her campaign last week.

It also works for Senator Kristen Gillibrand, who, as we previously reported, spent $1.6 million on TV/radio ads, only to drop out in August. (Her final Facebook-spending tally is unclear because the social network deletes candidates from its public database when they end their campaigns.)

And it seems appropriate for media billionaire Mike Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who joined the race about five minutes ago and yet somehow has already spent $58.4 million on TV/radio ads (including advance bookings), plus $1.3 million on Facebook ads, and—d’oh!—has failed to qualify for next week’s Democratic presidential debate.

And then there’s Tom Steyer—aka “Tom Who?” The San Francisco hedge fund billionaire has burned through an astonishing $77.1 million on TV/radio ads (also including advance bookings), plus $14 million on Facebook ads to date. For those keeping score at home, that adds up to $91.2 million, which means Mayor Mike is going to have to try a lot harder (read: spend a lot faster) if he wants to be first to, uh, achieve a $100-million campaign-ad burn rate this election cycle.
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mike Bloomberg Closes In On $100M In Campaign Ad Spending (Original Post) brooklynite Dec 2019 OP
He's already passed it redqueen Dec 2019 #1
an *average* of $3.7 million per day redqueen Dec 2019 #2
I agree PatSeg Dec 2019 #3
The part about Harris doesn't make much sense madville Dec 2019 #4
 

redqueen

(115,103 posts)
2. an *average* of $3.7 million per day
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:52 PM
Dec 2019

If he was willing to spend this to get democrats elected I'd be impressed.

The fact that he I spending it to get HIMSELF elected - not so much.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

PatSeg

(47,634 posts)
3. I agree
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:59 PM
Dec 2019

There are so many ways he could spend his wealth to make a difference. This feels too much like a vanity trip.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

madville

(7,412 posts)
4. The part about Harris doesn't make much sense
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 04:41 PM
Dec 2019

It says she only spent 2.9 million on TV/Radio/Facebook ads yet her campaign collected over 40 million before it shut down because they ran out of money? Sounds like they would have been better served on more advertising and a smaller organization out of the gate.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»Mike Bloomberg Closes In ...