Campaign Diaries

Two days ago, I detailed some of the DCCC’s recent expenditures to point out that Democrats were already investing heavily in House races while the NRCC was remaining silent. Such discrepancies are especially important in the House battle: While Barack Obama and John McCain saturate the airwaves with millions worth of ads ads and voters also hear about them in nightly news and in newspapers, House races don’t get anywhere near the same level of exposure - making any investment that much more valuable.

Last night, the gap continued to widen as the DCCC dumped $1.75 millions worth of advertisement in 15 districts (via Swing State Project), 12 of which are currently held by Republicans. Some of these buys are quite significant. A rundown:

• Defense: $82,615 in AL-05, $101,893 in AZ-05 (total: $295,997), $493,422 in NH-01
• Toss-ups: $70,800 in CT-04, $41,066 in IL-10, $114,848 in NC-08, $118,428 in OH-01
• Districts Dems at some point hoped to win easily: $82,615 in AZ-01, $40,953 in IL-11 (total: $525,936), $116,541 in NJ-07, $144,011 in NM-01 (total: $291,726), $111,899 in OH-15 (total: $385,491), $152,748 in OH-16 (total: $424,936)
• Less obvious: $32,645 in AL-02, $88,552 in PA-03

The NRCC has yet to spend anything in most of these districts, and if it has it’s been to conduct a poll (like in PA-03) rather than air ads. On the other hand, this is not the DCCC’s first investment in many of these districts, but it is in others. This represents, for instance, the DCCC’s first media buy in OH-01, CT-4, and IL-10, but also in Democratic-held NH-01.

The GOP primary was held recently and former Rep. Bradley won his party’s nomination; he doesn’t have that much money left yet and the feelings of much the Republican base are still bruised. The DCCC is trying to exploit this opening with a truly big ad buy. Among other interesting buys is the DCCC’s decision to pursue PA-03, a district that would not have been on most people’s minds a few weeks ago. Also, keep in mind that the cost of running ads varies widely depending on the media market, so $80,000 in Alabama actually buys you a lot of air time.

Most of these ads buys will be negative spots attacking Republican candidates - and most of them will probably contain grainy images of President Bush. As we have discussed before, the impact of this on the presidential race will be very interesting (though hard to track). Will it amplify Obama’s message against McCain and make sure that voters are thinking about Bush when casting their ballots? Or will it just make that argument banal when Obama uses it? Here is, for instance, the DCCC’s new spot against Bradley in NH-01. Since there is the most money behind this ad, it seems logical to choose this one to link to in this post:

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI_gbrirgtk"]

Meanwhile, a new ad by Bruce Lunsford in the Kentucky Senate race is using an interesting strategy: Using footage of McCain’s convention speech to hit Mitch McConnell’s for fitting the description of the “me-first country-second” insider politicians McCain is crusading against. The ad points out that McConnell voted for the “infamous” Bridge to Nowhere twice:

This is an obvious echo to Gordon Smith’s ads in Oregon’s Senate race in which he tied himself to Barack Obama, the difference being that Smith was touting his own ties to someone from the opposite party while this one uses McCain (who has had famous clashes in McConnell) to hit a member of the same party. It’s also a more obvious move for Lunsford than it was for Smith, given that Oregon is much more competitive at the presidential level than Kentucky is. Now, it will be interesting to see (1) whether McCain issues a release defending McConnell (as Obama did in Oregon) and (2) whether other Democrats running in red states use a similar strategy.

Finally, the DSCC’s new ad in Alaska’s Senate race is worth noting, as it hits Stevens on ethics without focusing on his indictment, thus echoing an ad put out by an independent group last week (with a significant $500,000 buy). Stevens still looks very competitive despite the fact that he was indicted in mid-July and he is running ads touting his clout in Washington to make the point that, whatever his ethical missteps, he brings money to Alaska and helps the state’s residents. Democrats know that Stevens’ indictement will be in the news in the next few weeks: his trial is set to start in a few days. What they need to fight against is Stevens’ argument that he still does good for Alaska, and that’s what this ad is arguing. “It’s not about Alaska anymore,” says the announcer:

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwlE8y-t8Jk"]