The GOP's major advantage going into the midterms...

[Moooooo]

Read this article.

Everyone is a Special Interest
In their hunt for voters, microtargeters study how you live and what you like

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Moooooo]

More on Chafee's victory

More on Microtargeting

[Whacker77]

Forgive me, but I'm not sure what your comment means.  Do you believe that Democrat optimism should be less because of this type of strategy?

[Moooooo]

Forgive me, but I'm not sure what your comment means.  Do you believe that Democrat optimism should be less because of this type of strategy?

Yeah, I worded that kind of weird.  Basically what Im trying to say is, given the current political climate one would think the Democrats are in great shape to make major gains.  However, I believe this microtargeting strategy is going to dramtically scale back GOP loses in the midterms.  Unless of course the Democrats have worked out all of their databse glitches and have deployed similar tactics in battleground races across the country.

Another thing that bothers me is Howard Dean hoarding DNC money.  Rahm has went on the record saying he's not getting the money he needs to win in November.

[Democratic Hawk]

Another thing that bothers me is Howard Dean hoarding DNC money.  Rahm has went on the record saying he's not getting the money he needs to win in November.

I suspect many Democrats share your concerns, Nick. However, others argue that Dean's way is the right way (i.e. using DNC funds as part of the more long-term 50 State Strategy effort). However, if the Democrats fail to win the House this time, it makes many wonder if they ever will

Either way Dean is taking a gamble, while Melman is leaving nothing to chance

Dave

[TheresNoMoney]

Another thing that bothers me is Howard Dean hoarding DNC money.  Rahm has went on the record saying he's not getting the money he needs to win in November.

Instead of spending money on TV ads, Dean has put the money into building up the state parties through better voter lists, paid staffers, more volunteers/grassroots interest and organizing.

It is stupid to think that political races are won solely through TV ads.

[Whacker77]

Not to hoard in on this Democrat discussion, but Bob Novak's currrent column is about Howard Dean.  I know he's not a Democrat favorite, but he has good sources.  Basically, he said things similar to what has been posted in this thread.  The RNC will spend 40 million in the most competative House seats while the DNC will spend just 2.4 million.  Just the other night, Hillary Clinton took a few shots at Dean's program.  She said they need to concern themselves with the short term (elections) and less with the long term (party building).  Bragging about party offices in Mississippi probably isn't a good idea.

[Smash255]

Another thing that bothers me is Howard Dean hoarding DNC money.  Rahm has went on the record saying he's not getting the money he needs to win in November.

Instead of spending money on TV ads, Dean has put the money into building up the state parties through better voter lists, paid staffers, more volunteers/grassroots interest and organizing.

It is stupid to think that political races are won solely through TV ads.

I agree with both sides on this one.  We do need to start to build for a 50 state strategy, but we should probably take some of the $$$ we are spending on that and focus it in the races we need to.  Their needs to be some happy medium there someplace of funding the races that are needed and growing the state organizations.

[poughies]

While microtargeting bothers me, Stabenow will cruise. In other states, I do worry.

[ATFFL]

Dean is doing the right thing, but a bit too much of it.  50 state strategy sounds great.  Should say 50 and do 35-40.  The savings could be enough to make winning  the House much easier.

He is trying to catch up to the Republicans in terms of staff and such.  The Reps took a huge lead following 1996 in terms of troops on the ground for GOTV and other grassroots efforts.  Dems tried to farm it out to MoveOn and other groups.  Doesn't work.

[Deano963]

Not to hoard in on this Democrat discussion, but Bob Novak's currrent column is about Howard Dean.  I know he's not a Democrat favorite, but he has good sources.  Basically, he said things similar to what has been posted in this thread.  The RNC will spend 40 million in the most competative House seats while the DNC will spend just 2.4 million.  Just the other night, Hillary Clinton took a few shots at Dean's program.  She said they need to concern themselves with the short term (elections) and less with the long term (party building).  Bragging about party offices in Mississippi probably isn't a good idea.

Whacker - how many times and on how many different threads are you going to repeat this trash?

[Whacker77]

Hey Howard Deano963, money makes a difference and Democrats are taking a few shots at Dean.  Since you're a liberal and a Democrat, I'm sure you love the NY Times and they have an article saying the same thing.  If the comments I make are trash (they're not), why is Hillary Clinton complaining about the same thing.  Even Time magazine has an article today that mentions this topic.  And by the way, regardless of some of your comments, I don't think I've ever called them trash.  If the party money figures (RNC and DNC) I've used are wrong, provide a link.

[Deano963]

Hey Howard Deano963, money makes a difference and Democrats are taking a few shots at Dean.  Since you're a liberal and a Democrat, I'm sure you love the NY Times and they have an article saying the same thing.  If the comments I make are trash (they're not), why is Hillary Clinton complaining about the same thing.  Even Time magazine has an article today that mentions this topic.  And by the way, regardless of some of your comments, I don't think I've ever called them trash.  If the party money figures (RNC and DNC) I've used are wrong, provide a link.

Hey Slow Whacker I am calling them trash b/c you posted these exact same crap on another thread and I posted info showing you why none of this matters, yet you STLL insist on acting as if the republicans have it in the bag over this "advantage" that dosen't exist when you take into account the info I provided you. I guess you can lead a dumb horse to water but you can't make it drink......

[Whacker77]

Whoa! First of all, the cheap shots are not necessary.  Second, I have never said and will never say the Republicans have anything in the bag because of money.  Quite the contrary, I think the only thing they have in the bag is a big loss.  As for the union money that will be spent for the Democrats, it a good advantage for your side.  I never said it wasn't.  The money I made mention to concerned things other than the GOTV effort such as candidate advertising.  Having said that, the RNC has already set aside more than 60 million for their own GOTV effort.  I was just trying to add a bit to the microtargeting topic that was mentioned in this thread.

[Reignman]

GOP has money and gerrymandering going for 'em. Dems have Bush=unpopular. There ya go.

[Moooooo]

The R.N.C. plans to lay out more than $60 million on turnout efforts and advertising vs. the more than $14 million set aside by Democratic National Committee (D.N.C.) chairman Howard Dean. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, who has been critical of Dean's approach, complained at a D.N.C. fund-raising luncheon in Washington last week that the G.O.P. "is pouring tens of millions of dollars into races, and we're not matching that." House Republican officials contend that many of their Democratic challengers are so little known that they could be buried in an ad blitz. "You hit them, and they fold like a house of cards," a strategist said.