CSM: "Campaign Ads: Who Listens?"

[swag]

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0809/p01s02-uspo.html?s=ent

short but mildly interested piece in today's CSM

. . .

The DNC ad, the first of this election by the party's independent-expenditure wing, which by law cannot coordinate with the Kerry campaign, shows excerpts of Kerry's acceptance speech from the convention and seeks to portray him as a war leader.

The Bush campaign has also launched a new ad, called "Together." It continues the campaign's effort to put forth a more positive message - so no Kerry-bashing - stating that "we're rising to the challenge" of fighting terrorism and growing the economy.

All told, the two campaigns and their allies have spent more than $250 million in ads thus far in an election cycle that features unparalleled intensity, unusually early. And in the end, all this message-mongering sways very few votes.

"Ninety-nine percent of this election is not being decided by TV advertising," says Ken Goldstein, head of a University of Wisconsin project tracking political advertising.

. . .

[sui generis]

1. I live in Texas

We almost never see prime time pro-Dem political ads -- and few Republican ads.

It's almost as if neither side wants to waste money here on the fact that it's a dark red state already.

[JuniorPlankton]

2. I live in Mass

and it's the same here.
For a different reason, though :)

[buycitgo]

3. Peter Hart's focus group in Ohio

dealt with this, IIRC

I've also read/seen joe shmo say that the ADS about kerry flipflopping have affected their opinions of him

that 60 million on attack ads worked pretty damn well, IMO

they DEFINED him as a flipflopper, and he will NEVER be able to wash that out of the public conscsiousness

he should have done what Clinton did

he blew it on that, as he BLEW it on the 87 billion vote last week, when he REFUSED to answer STephie the attack chihuahua's question on the subject