TV ads score big in Bush turnaround

[Nazgul35]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-29-bush-ads_x.htm

Not good news!

Before people fly off the handle...remember that most voters are uninformed about Kerry, and Bush is providing them with information....the result is that it is having an impact...

And remember that this was with the 507s spending money, or Bush would be up even higher....Bush has been the recipient of 3 years of propoganda...it is going to take alot of money and time to undercut his support..

This is not good news. Kerry needs to raise a shit load of cash yesterday and start pushing back against this....and he has to provide an alternative policy to the American people...

If this is not stopped, by the time of the convention, we could be in real trouble....

From the article:

WASHINGTON — A week of hearings on Capitol Hill and criticism from a former counterterrorism aide have eroded President Bush's poll standing on fighting terrorism. But that's nothing compared to the damage that Bush's campaign ads may have done to Democratic candidate John Kerry.

A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows a remarkable turnaround in 17 battleground states where polls and historic trends indicate the race will be close, and where the Bush campaign has aired TV ads. Those ads say Bush has provided "steady leadership in times of change" while portraying Kerry as a tax-hiking, flip-flopping liberal.

--snip--

In contrast, there has been much less volatility in states where the ads haven't aired. Kerry held a four-point lead in them in February; Bush holds a two-point lead now.

The Bush campaign also has begun defining Kerry before he has defined himself. In the states where the ads have run, Kerry's unfavorable rating has risen 16 points since mid-February. In the other states, it's up just five points. The margin of error for each group of states is +/- 5 percentage points.

"For Kerry having won the nomination, voters came away not knowing much about him," says Kathryn Dunn Tenpas of the Brookings Institution, author of a study of re-election campaigns titled Presidents as Candidates. "He's a blank slate to a lot of people, so negative ads can have a big impact."

This is after Bush has only spent a minor fraction of his money...wait until he unloads with a major broadside against Kerry...

[emulatorloo]

1. Kerry Ad "Fought for America" to Run in 17 States

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0322.html

New Ad Highlights Kerry’s Plan to Put Opportunity in the Hands of All Americans

Ad Called "Fought for America" to Run in 17 States

<snip>

The 30-second spot will run in 17 states beginning Tuesday: Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, New Mexico, Oregon, Wisconsin, Florida, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, West Virginia, Arizona, Arkansas, Washington and Ohio.

<snip>

Have seen it a few times in Iowa

[leyton]

2. It's early and the race is still fluid.

Kerry wasn't supposed win the nomination either.

I think if we define Kerry to voters closer to the election, we'll be in good shape coming into the debates.

[Imalittleteapot]

3. I agree. It's early.

I don't believe there will be debates, so Kerry must define himself, as well as attack Bush on all of his lies and the damage he's done. I'm in no hurry. Drive it home closer to the election.

[stellanoir]

4. swing states. . .

are just that. The only thing this demonstrates is that swing states are comprised of fickle folks who are not yet committed.

Calm down. . .Kerry was on vacation for a week and George "dubious" has been barraging the brainless with bogus braggadocio. We have 7 months, at least three books, countless scandals, the not so graceful transition of power in Iraq, two conventions, and god only knows what else. The fat lady hasn't even warmed up.

Wait for Zogby. . .there far less skewed than Gallup.

[Nazgul35]

6. wow....

that's the first time I ever heard someone say that Zogby is what we should be waiting for.... :evilgrin:

And as far as the calm down stuff....tell me when I should not be calm....when we lose?

What's wrong with discussing the current events of the campaign, or are we supposed to sit in front of the computer and wait for further instructions?

What happened to a healthy debate around here? This has happened....what is to be done? Thoughts? Don't step on people becuase your perception is that this is not a problem..... :spank:

thanxs!!! :evilgrin:

[Nazgul35]

5. I would agree with you...

if one of those definitions is not "no chance of winning."

Something that we must watch out for...don't get me wrong, I think the Clarke stuff is going to play havoc with Bush's support and isn't making its way into any polls yet as most Americans are still trying to figure it out....

but Kerry can not sit on the sidelines forever on this issue...he needs to step up and pick up the charges, otherwise, if the voters don't see it as part of the debate, it will disappear from the dialog as all the other scandals and idiocy of this administration has to date...

[mikey_1962]

7. Means nothing until Labor Day.......

[Stargleamer]

12. At this rate, Kerry will be 19 pts. behind by then...

Bush is getting the votes of people gullible enough to be swayed by biased TV ads, a HUGE percentage of the electorate.

The millions Bush Sr. spent to define Dukakis also hurt Dukakis. Bush Jr. has many more millions to spend on these ads then Kerry.

Soros needs to come through for Kerry, to find someway to use his millions to make this a more level playing field.

[Zynx]

8. You are panicking WAY too much.

If I saw you in person doing this, I would smack you for being a hysteric.

[Nazgul35]

9. Panicking?

Only on DU would raising concerns be considered panicking....

So when do we get to discuss this? When he's 10% down? 20%? 30%?

What is your threshold of concern?

I don't think I was panicking at all but rather raising a concern about the recent trends in polls...

If anything, I would say your reaction was rather over the top....

Can't we have discussion on the campaign or is that still verboten?

[Zynx]

11. This is poor analysis.

Kerry's numbers were ungodly inflated immediately after the primaries. He never really had those leads it looked like he had and a 60% favorability rating in an intensely partisan election wasn't going to last either. They NEVER have. You seem to advocate rapidly changing strategy every time a new poll comes out. Of course we are going to respond with our own ads. Of course Kerry is going to start upping the ante. However, panicking about every negative poll that comes out and demanding a reassesment of strategy is a horrible idea and would make any problems, whether they actually exist or not, much worse.

[moondust]

10. So says the ad seller.

I'm not convinced it's about the ads.

"there has been much less volatility in states where the ads haven't aired"

Of course the ads have only aired in the volatile states.

The media medicine men are constantly telling the campaigns that they need to buy more medicine. Seems that somebody at the Brookings Institution has picked up on their mantra.

If Republimedia can convince people that it's all about ads and how many you can buy it helps to secure their own distorted role in deciding elections as well as boost their profits, and in the ad game Repugs always win because of their financial advantage.