Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

A daunting Obama ground game awaits Romney

As he moves unceasingly toward the Republican presidential nomination, Mitt Romney has cast himself as the only GOP candidate with an organization hefty enough to take on President Obama's campaign juggernaut.

"The other guys are nice folks, but they haven't organized a campaign with a staff, the organization, the fundraising capacity to actually beat Barack Obama," Romney said this month on Fox News. "I have."

But an examination of how the two campaigns have spent their money in the last year starkly illustrates the huge advantage Obama will have in mounting a ground operation to identify voters and get them to the polls in November.

Spared a primary opponent, the president's reelection campaign by the end of February had pumped nearly $79 million into laying the groundwork for the general election, deploying staff to far-flung corners of the country such as Laramie, Wyo., and Lebanon, N.H., as part of an ambitious, tech-savvy field effort.

Romney, mired for months in a contentious primary, has not yet devoted substantial resources to a national field program. Of the $68 million spent so far by his campaign, $25.4 million went to fundraising and media ads in primary states, elements that — while key to his front-runner standing — may not translate into lasting gains.

He has spent only $5 million on staff, compared with the $20 million Obama has doled out for his campaign workers. For its reach, Romney's campaign plans to lean on the Republican Party, which has yet to set up shop in states long inhabited by Obama operatives.

The spending data and interviews with campaign officials suggest that a Romney-Obama race would be a clash between distinct political philosophies, one that would test the power of an aerial bombardment through television ads against an in-person voter mobilization months in the making.

Both campaigns will employ commercials and ground organizers to make their cases, of course. But media use is the specialty of top Romney campaign officials Matt Rhoades, Eric Fehrnstrom, Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer, who have backgrounds in communications and ad production. And Romney is poised to benefit from intense air cover provided by Restore Our Future, a "super PAC" that has already spent $37 million, largely on TV ads attacking his GOP rivals.

Romney campaign strategists acknowledge they have a small field operation, by design. Instead of hiring get-out-the-vote organizers around the country, a lean team has leapfrogged in and out of the various primary states. That has kept costs down, but it also means Romney has a smaller national footprint than Obama.

Campaign political director Rich Beeson said he had kept some staff in states that would be key for the general election. But he said the bulk of the voter registration and mobilization program for the fall would be handled by the Republican National Committee.

"It has the infrastructure in place," he said. "We're taking care of business in the primary, setting up infrastructure in states that make sense in a general. But at the end of the day, I'm not losing sleep over having a general election field operation. I know that's being taken care of."

That's a very different philosophy from that of Obama and his top political aides, David Plouffe and David Axelrod. In 2008, Obama's operation wrested the Democratic nomination on the strength of an unprecedented field operation that — in tandem with massive fundraising — lifted the former community organizer over the establishment candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The campaign appears poised to be even more aggressive this year. Volunteers are registering new voters in an effort to expand the pool of supporters. They are knocking on doors to identify likely voters — an activity that usually occurs in the summer or fall. And the reelection effort has begun blanketing battleground states with field offices, including 18 in Florida, 13 in Pennsylvania and eight in Iowa. In the process, Obama's apparatus has locked up local Democratic operatives across the country much earlier than expected.

by Anonymousreply 3711/09/2012

So daunting they gave away Congress in 2010 without even the slightest effort.

by Anonymousreply 103/26/2012

That was Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Obama wasn't on the ballot that year.

by Anonymousreply 203/26/2012

I hope Obama's efforts smash/demolish/destroy Romney's Presidential bid.

by Anonymousreply 303/26/2012

Actually it was Rahm Emmanuel, the DINO who was in charge of the Congressional elections that year.

by Anonymousreply 403/26/2012

[quote]So daunting they gave away Congress in 2010 without even the slightest effort.

Actually, the President wasn't running for Congress that year.

by Anonymousreply 503/27/2012

[quote]The point is that Obama didn't try and he won't try again this year. He will give it away if he can, as he already proved with his comment to Medvedev. The lazy dimwitted fake fool is starting to prepare the nation for President Romney.

You're a dolt.

by Anonymousreply 703/27/2012

Am I? Have you actually followed what Mr. Obama does with his time? Do you know he has actually spoken to the American people LESS than the lazy and ridiculous George W. Bush?

by Anonymousreply 803/27/2012

That's because Obama spends more time doing, and less time talking.

by Anonymousreply 903/27/2012

That's clearly not the case R9. He vacations and junkets all the time. His legislative record: very meager. His administrative effort: well if there is any and he hasn't told us about it, then he should. But the whole part where you are supposed to lead the nation and explain things to the people? He's the worst president since Calvin Coolidge.

by Anonymousreply 1003/27/2012

Who would you like to be President, R10?

by Anonymousreply 1103/27/2012

And when he does speak to the people he exaggerates the recovery. Bush did this too, but Obama doesn't seem to understand that the 2008 meltdown made people trust their own instincts over the government's numbers. Yeah, things are getting better, but they are in a shit state and he's gonna lose if he acts like he's done something magical, or even minimally competent, in this area because the whole public knows it isn't true.

by Anonymousreply 1203/27/2012

Paul Krugman, Frank Rich, Paul Craig Roberts, there are lots of folks who would do a better job.

by Anonymousreply 1303/27/2012

Jennifer Grantholm if she hadn't been so stupid as to be born in Canada.

by Anonymousreply 1403/27/2012

Actually she's not as progressive as one would want.

Certainly Al Sharpton would be ideal.

by Anonymousreply 1503/28/2012

$5.00 per gallon gasoline.

Obama down for the count...

by Anonymousreply 1603/28/2012

"Certainly Al Sharpton would be ideal"

Oh my sides!

by Anonymousreply 1703/28/2012

He has options to bring gas prices down. I wish he would use them.

by Anonymousreply 1803/28/2012

Gas prices peak in June/July and drop by October.

They're not an issue.

A resolution to Iran will be announced, knocking them down.

Does anyone here *read* a newspaper?

by Anonymousreply 1903/28/2012

Karl Rove and his 50 state elections strategy have a pretty daunting ground game. And the money to pull it off. All they need to do is energize the base to vote against Obama who they will demonize, and elect the affable Romney/Reagan.

by Anonymousreply 2003/28/2012

[quote] the affable Romney

Yeah, R20, people LOVE Mitt Romney.

by Anonymousreply 2103/28/2012

When Obamacare goes down, the Right will crawl over broken glass to vote to make sure it doesn't rise up like a zombie.

Since nobody on the Left cared for the plan, they won't bother to show.

by Anonymousreply 2203/28/2012

Even Andrea Tantaros of Fox News said that Mitt Romney has problems energizing Republicans.

And this is AFTER all of the money he's spending in the GOP primary states.

by Anonymousreply 2303/28/2012

[quote]That was Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Obama wasn't on the ballot that year.

It was a referendum on Obama, dope. He's the reason why all the Pugs went out and voted.

by Anonymousreply 2403/28/2012

[quote]That's because Obama spends more time doing, and less time talking.

This man has addressed the nation more times than Bush ever did. In fact, it was so many times he went out there to "talk" that people, that the "people" shut him off, and told him STFU.

He got branded as "all talk", and a President who couldn't speak without a teleprompter.

by Anonymousreply 2503/28/2012

[quote]Certainly Al Sharpton would be ideal.


That racist, POS buffoon.

He would get 1% of the vote.

Nobody wants him except Black Panthers.

by Anonymousreply 2603/28/2012

[quote]Karl Rove and his 50 state elections strategy have a pretty daunting ground game.

That was Howard Deans' 50 state strategy, you moron.

Rove was the one who said that the Right would win Congress in 2006. Rove is a failure, and DOA today. Nobody listens, nor wants him. He's part of the establishment, and nobody listens to him in even those quarters. He's been over for years.

by Anonymousreply 2703/28/2012

Have any of you reality-challenged GOPWTF-ers seen recent swing state polling? Hmmm? Or Mittens' favorable/unfavorable numbers? Especially among "independents" and "moderates"? Hmm?

Of course, a lot can happen between now and election day, but President Obama is in an enviable position at this point in the campaign.

PLUS - one of the candidates is a gaffe-prone, tone deaf, robot with the charisma of a wet noodle.

And one isn't.

by Anonymousreply 2803/28/2012

It's even playing CALIFORNIA? Heaven forfend!

That movie could play on every television channel from here till election day, and Willard will still lose. He can't help himself

by Anonymousreply 3009/14/2012

Did gregory type that rant by slapping his fists onto the keyboard?

by Anonymousreply 3109/14/2012

Ignore it, please.

by Anonymousreply 3209/14/2012

[quote]the democrats will loose the senate too.

Oh, dear.

by Anonymousreply 3309/14/2012

Christ on cross! If R29 is the best these losers can come up with, we have nothing to fear.

by Anonymousreply 3409/14/2012

If only ever rightwinger were like R29. We like to think they're all idiots. R29 proves it.

by Anonymousreply 3509/14/2012

Why on earth would the troll at R29 bump up a thread from 6 months ago that points out the tremendous disadvantage Romney has in this election? And then do nothing to refute the original story? A problem with strategic thinking, clearly. Something that has plagued the Romney campaign from the beginning.

As of the beginning of September, Obama has a HUGE advantage in the number of field offices in key battleground swing states.

by Anonymousreply 3609/14/2012

I love re-reading threads like these...


by Anonymousreply 3711/09/2012
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!