Page 1 of 1

Spending on ads

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:54 am
by MorGrendel
I saw this and found it surprising. If money buys elections, well I guess this says something...
Money in Advertising.PNG

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:10 pm
by Berserker
This doesn't really mean anything since every news channel and every show, all they talk about is Trump. The amount of free advertising he's getting is staggering. If anything, it shows just how much the Clinton camp has to spend to keep up.

But I agree, money rules in politics. They are all bought by someone..

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 7:34 am
by boagrius
Trump has learned. There's no such thing as bad publicity. Why spend money when you can say something stupid and everyone will talk about it. There not running for office anymore. It's a popularity contest. And trump is a Kardashian.

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 9:57 am
by MorGrendel
True on all counts for sure, but it's the math of it I think is interesting.

Pro-Clinton has outspent by Pro-Trump by 10 fold, but only has a 14 point lead against Trump. Also interesting is that in most polls she only has a 7 point lead against a third party candidate. I guess I wonder how little you can spend and still win the presidency.

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:36 am
by Thomas Fitzcharles
Good Day, all.

Maybe if she gave a press meeting she would get some coverage 265 days and counting oh and jimme kimle doesn't count.

sincerely

Thomas

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:52 am
by Fritz
Thomas Fitzcharles wrote:Good Day, all.

Maybe if she gave a press meeting she would get some coverage 265 days and counting oh and jimme kimle doesn't count.

sincerely

Thomas
Not sure I can blame her at this point. She's an eminently unlikable candidate. She's only winning because Trump is even less likeable. Why expose yourself to potential negative attention when you can just run out the clock? Trump seems to be doing a good enough job shooting himself in the foot. She doesn't have much to gain from a press conference. It's like being up 28-0 in the 4th quarter. You're just playing prevent defense at that point and waiting for the clock to hit zero.

To be clear, I 100% agree. Give a damned press conference. I just happen to begrudgingly see the tactical sense.

Re: Spending on ads

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 6:40 am
by Thomas Fitzcharles
Good Day, Fritz

I can't argue with the logic. The more she speaks the lower her numbers go. I would just like to see both of them have to answer a few hard hitting questions once in a while or at least questions that are not scripted for them. Not that either would answer truthfully. But watching them try to spin off the cuff might give a little more insight. Not that we don't know where she stands on most issues. He is a little harder since he has no public voting record and has been on both sides of the isle. An words mean nothing til you get into office and start governing.

Sincerely

Thomas