Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!

[Night Gal]

Note: if you are unable to separate fact from emotion, do not read.
*****************

Today's news that the Kerry Campaign has basically given up on MO, AK and LA (pulling all ad money) and conceded these states to the chimp is an insanely stupid move! Who the hell made that decision?

With all the polls floating around I thought I'd look up some trends, and I have to say that this move is not a good omen.

Six states have polled correctly 100% of the time in the last 9 elections for the eventual winner - AK, KY, LA, OH, MO, and TN.

Results/Polling data at:
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/G04/President-1972-2000.phtml?format=winner

Where do these 6 states stand right now?

AK - (* - currently up 2 points)
KY - (* - currently up 15 points)
LA - (* - no current figures, but Kerry has given up on it)
OH - (* - currently up 3 points)
MO - (* - currently up 2 points)
TN - (* - currently up 2 points)

Now I'll agree that one, possibly 2, of these states could suffer their first deviation from records of 100% prediction accuracy, but to give the fuck up on half of them is IMHO a terribly stupid move.

Folks, we have to write to the DNC and get them to press for these 6 states, and we need to do it NOW! I've gone out on a personal limb and contacted a friend from the past about this to express my dissatisfaction with this recent decision, and I urge you all to do the same.

The debates alone are NOT going to change these 6 key states all to a Win for Kerry without advertising.

WTF is happening to the campaign?
Who is really running the show?

[Clinton Crusader]

1. read here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x889795
:kick:

[Night Gal]

12. No..... read here:

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=2313

and here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-07-27-kerry-ad-money_x.htm

Mention is made that they may restore SOME of the money to only MO

[goodhue]

2. The news is not accurate.

They are merely not buying ads for the week.
Doesn't mean they won't buy ads in future or otherwise campaign.
Resources are limited.

[Cocoa]

3. Kerry didn't concede those states

some people on TV are interepreting it that way, but that's not the way it is. Kerry could resume ads there later.

[alittlelark]

4. uh, yeah

[wolfgirl]

5. Cool your jets...

another poster indicated they got an e-mail from the campaign that they are reducing their ads for 1 week only. Maybe they are going to fine tune and start with some new ones.

Considering Bush & Co. gave us tons of new ammo, fine tuning the ads to address this new crap makes sense.

Kerry can/will prevail! Take heart & smile!!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. Can you just see it in a month or so when the goods are had on

Allawi.... and shrub has to say (as he did for Chalabi) Allawi who? You never know... you just never know with these guys....

[blm]

6. Get a grip. Kerry is putting ads back up in a week.

The DNC is covering ads in those states during that time.

The traitors to democracy in the media SPUN it as if Kerry was conceding defeat because that is the spin Rove TOLD them to use.

[TX-RAT]

7. I believe this is a pro Kerry web site

[MARALE]

8. Only for a week

And only Kerry's campaign money. It is reported by "liberal" media to make it seem like Kerry is giving in with these states-this is not true.

[Night Gal]

21. a week?

And where do you get that information from?

I know that the campaign always has the opportunity to try and get these ads reshuffled again, but I've seen no real references to do that as planned strategy.

[blondeatlast]

23. Picking and choosing where you respond won't get you far; Clinton Crusader

has already pointed out that the campaign has not given up any of these states.

[gratuitous]

9. Speaking of your subject line

Look around. The campaign is cancelling a week's worth of ad buys in some states. They aren't "pulling out" or "writing off" anything.

When you see something like this, ask yourself: "Who's telling me this? Is it the campaign? Or someone else?" If it's someone other than the campaign, get over to the website and see if it's actually true.

This may come as a shocker, but there are some people out there with access to the media who will spin a story so that it looks as bad as possible -- usually against the Democrats.

Just a little free advice, and probably worth every penny!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. By AK do you mean Alaska?

Or Arkansas? I've heard that ads were pulled from Arkansas.

It is a stupid move. I've seen more Kerry/Edwards signs around NW Arkansas (the most conservative part of the state) than I ever had before-about the same number as Repuke signs.

I know folks around here are doing their best, talking one on one to folks. Frankly, with the cynicism I've seen towards the news media, I think this is the most effective way of campaigning.

Don't think for a minute that the Dems in AR and neighboring MO have given up-the ones I know have NOT!!!!!!!!

[Bandit]

31. I'm sure he means Arkansas.. there has been no mention

of Alaska in any of this. Neither Candidate is spending one dime in Alaska. It is a lock for Bush* and is only worth three electoral votes anyway. I believe we may elect a Democrat as Senator though. Good chance anyway.

[Night Gal]

36. oops - I meant AR

[Julien Sorel]

11. Hilarious.

Note: if you are unable to separate fact from emotion, do not read.

Was this thread a subtle, but weak, attempt at irony? Or is it simply the waste of bits and bytes I think it is.

[blondeatlast]

14. None so blind as those who will not see...

You've received planty of responses that indicate you're wrong about the entire issue.

Instead of pissing and moaning, do some phone banking to these states. I'm in Arizona, and we have people from out of state phone banking and some coming in to canvass. AZ is VERY much in play. I KNOW that they have definitely NOT given up on Arizona.

The campaign has been SEVERELY handicapped by the media. We can moan, or we can do something to counteract the effect.

The choice is yours.

[Night Gal]

19. from the AZ Republic

"The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Arizona, Arkansas and Louisiana are unlikely to see Kerry ads unless there is a major shift in the campaign's dynamics. "

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0923kerry23.html

As I mentioned in the original post, I have written and called folks I know in the CA Party to express my feelings.

[blondeatlast]

22. The Republic is aptly named.

The article, which I read first thing this morning, is CLEARLY very biased.

[troublemaker]

15. How to spot a disruptive argument

The argument is selective data-mining at its worst, and thus was assembled FOR THE PURPOSE of making an ad hoc "Kerry will lose" argument. The poster is perhaps less than sincere?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

18. I thought the title referred to Bush

:)

[Night Gal]

25. Bullshit

I swear, some of you folks are just plain paranoid.

I've worked locally for Kerry for a hell of a long time, I replace the sign in my yard nearly weekly (keeps disappearing), and have sent donations up to my limits and my capabilities to the DNC for the past 6 years.

Why on earth some of you prefer to kill the messenger time and time again is beyond me.

I lurked here for months before finally registering a few days ago. My hesitancy to do so was mainly because of the crap I've seen hurled at anyone who doesn't tow the party line. That is bullshit to do to people who simply look at the same picture and see a slightly different view.

You can dismiss my references as data mining (after all I'm sitting in a damn hotel in Fresno with limited resources) but please do not question my sincerity. You are incorrect as to my intent. I certainly do NOT want Kerry to lose, but errors by the campaign managers piss me off.

I guess you prefer your women remain in the missionary position and keep their damn mouths shut, eh?

[Julien Sorel]

30. I hate to belabor a point (well, not really I don't), but...

This statement,

I guess you prefer your women remain in the missionary position and keep their damn mouths shut, eh?

seems to be at odds with this one:

Note: if you are unable to separate fact from emotion, do not read.

For someone who seems to dislike emotion, you sure are displaying a lot of it.


Anyway, Fresno kind of sucks, so you get some sympathy from me. I wouldn't want to be there either.

[Night Gal]

32. We agree on the Fresno thing....

but it's a trip for a special friend, so what can I do?

I don't dislike emotion, but try to view things and situations in my own life by looking at the facts and not clouding my decisions with an emotional tie.

I am a bit exciteable when it comes to this stuff as I really HATE that POS we have for POTUS right now and don't want another 4 years of it.

I am passionate about getting this country back on track and prolly go a bit overboard at times.

I'll try to be a bit less vocal.

[Lex]

16. LOL!

"Note: if you are unable to separate fact from emotion, do not read."

Oh, sweet irony.

[blondeatlast]

20. I don't think she came to DU for honest debate; if the avatar

doesn't clue you in, the profile will.

If there are any single, straight males on DU with time on their hands before the election...

:wtf: am I saying???

[Night Gal]

28. Ouch!

I'm truly sorry that you are unncomfortable with who/what I am and apparently do not fit your mold.

I am very satisfied with the choices I have made.
I certainly do not need to troll the boards looking for platonic relationships.

[Radical Activist]

17. Bush has never been above the margin of error in Arkansas

and Kerry has had the lead in some AR polls. If this is true I guess it must be because AR has so few electoral college votes. Still, giving up on 6 EV's in a state that has been tied for the last five months seems pretty dimwitted.

[blondeatlast]

24. I'll make it easy for you; Clinton Crusaders OP in its entirety:

Got this from Kerry Campaign on pulling out of MO, AZ, AR, and LA

They're just cancelling their tv ad buy for one week. That's it. They're not giving up on the states. They aren't even necessarily giving up on advertising on tv in those states during that week. They're just not using Kerry campaign money to do so. This allows the Kerry campaign to save that money for other things later, possibly after seeing where that money is needed the most after the first debate next week.

[DaveinMD]

26. again

they haven't given up on those states. Kerry's ads are cycling down for a few days to save a little money. DNC ads will still be up as will 527s.

[Clinton Crusader]

27. You believe what you want, but

I wouldnt believe the media if they stood under a clock and told me the time.
:kick:

[ClassWarrior]

29. Breathe now...

Kerry's not conceding anything. He's making a temporary strategic decision based on a variety of interrelated factors. Like a real President does. Or as GWB* would describe it to his Neanderthal acolytes, he's flip-flopping.

23.

[zbdent]

33. Funny, they're always touting Ohio's importance (far less EVs than

2000).

They always say - "No Republican has won without carrying Ohio."

I say "Big fat hairy effing deal."

Let's see:

Nixon carried Ohio in 1960. Lost to JFKennedy. - oops.

The almanac I am using only goes back to 1952. I would have to search further to cite more examples.

But wait, here's an interesting note:

Bush carried Ohio in 2000. Gore won the election, but lost the Selection.

Here's another (hopefully prophetic) note:

1988: Bush 41 had 2,416,549 votes from Ohio.

Whoops, 1992: Bush 41 got 1,894,310 votes from Ohio.

Dukakis got 1,939,629 in 1988; Clinton got about 50K more than that - 1,984,942 - nearly dead even with Bush 41.

Fun with stats.

[FirstDoNoHarm]

34. No need to worry

With CA, NY, PA and FL Kerry will run away with this cakewalk. There is no time here for fear. Bush is toast so stop worrying.

[Thrill]

35. Calm the heck down

Its only for a week. You have to save money and be smart on win to advertise in certain places.