Ty Webb;1304540 wrote:http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/10/25/romney_downplays_early_vote_while_seeking_it.html


"Facing a massive early voting deficit less than two weeks out from election day, the Romney campaign is projecting a mixed message as the candidate works to keep alive his claim to momentum," McKay Coppins reports.

"In memos and press gaggles, Republicans insist they're so far behind by strategic choice -- focusing their efforts on helping unlikely voters get to the polls now, and leaving their enthusiastic base to fend for themselves on November 6."

"But as Mitt Romney and Senator Rob Portman zig-zagged across Ohio Thursday, they repeatedly made a point of pleading for early votes from the cheering partisans who gathered at their rallies -- the very group the campaign says they're not trying to get to the polls."

gut;1304551 wrote:LOL, what Ty refuses to acknowledge is early voting was significantly wider in 2008 when Obama got just 51.38% in Ohio. Compare to 2008 and early voting indicates his '08 winning margin is gone.

You can shuttle likely voters to the polls early (now we know why only 20+ days was such a big deal for Dems), but you just can't get the unlikely voters to win you the election.

Obama is definitely winning at hand-holding his voters all the way to the polls. God forbid they'd have to get off their ass and go vote on their own Nov. 6

I Wear Pants;1304622 wrote:Yeah, what the hell has this country come to, people offering to drive others to exercise their right to vote? Might as well burn up the constitution while they're at it. :rolleyes:

sportchampps;1304638 wrote:My mom said Kennedy supporters did the same thing in her town in West Virginia when she was younger. She said they would drive them to the polls and give them 5$ to vote for Kennedy. $5 was a lot of money to the people in her town

I Wear Pants;1304622 wrote:Yeah, what the hell has this country come to, people offering to drive others to exercise their right to vote? Might as well burn up the constitution while they're at it. :rolleyes:

gut;1304633 wrote:Maybe if it was bipartisan it would be a little more on the up and up. Nor should someone be voting for a certain candidate because a nice young man picked them up, or maybe a meal was involved...

se-alum;1304877 wrote:Romney now buying Ad time in Minnesota.

gut;1304879 wrote:Interesting. I don't think MN is in play, but I guess if you win you still want people who don't vote for you to be ok with it.

The other possibility is there's no available ad time left in the key swing states. I think I saw that somewhere the other day.

Ty Webb;1304887 wrote:I agree with your second statement gut....could they reach Wisconsin voters from Minnesota ads?

Another benefit in purchasing time in Minneapolis is that you get your message seen in parts of Wisconsin. The Minneapolis market reaches approximately 5% of neighboring Wisconsin, where there is a fierce ad battle ongoing. CNN rates Wisconsin as a "toss-up" state.

Ty Webb;1304920 wrote:President Obama had a steady 2 point lead in Ohio...if that holds over the next 7 days President Obama will be re-elected

like_that;1304925 wrote:Where did you get that from? MTV.com?

Ty Webb;1304926 wrote:Every Ohio poll in the last week had the President up 2-3. If that holds..Obama wins Ohio. He wins Ohio...he wins the election. Simple as that

like_that;1304931 wrote:Yes gibby, we know how important Ohio is, you don't need to repeat it. We also know you are speaking out of your ass. Rasmussen has Ohio tied. Nice fail though.