It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP Outsmarted Democrats in Spending (2010 Mid-Terms)

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Even before the election returns begin to flood in, Republican insiders are privately high-fiving each other over their execution of a politically risky strategy that enabled them to outflank their Democratic counterparts, transforming this election cycle into a category 5 anti-Democratic hurricane.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7da2373b8dfb.jpg[/atsimg]
As first reported Monday in The Rothenberg Political Report, sources at the National Republican Congressional Committee are saying they took a roll of the dice and opened their wallets early, spending heavily in rural, less-expensive media markets while Democrats opted to hold on to their cash for a last-minute advertising push in the closing weeks of the election.

According to a Roll Call analysis, Republicans had spent $11.3 through the independent-expenditure arm of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) as of Sept. 30, compared to $4.1 million for Democrats. It now appears that Democratic strategy has backfired.

This was reflected in the FEC filings that showed the NRCC with just $19 million left in its coffers, compared to $41.6 million remaining for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

Source: www.newsmax.com...

Them darn Republicans.... Out thinking us-Again! This political season is getting to be just too funny as we watch the Democratic political machine become completely dismantled. What's gonna be next? Something like
Bill Clinton trying to convince another Black Demorcate canidate that it is best if he drops out of the race? Wait-that already happened too.


The early reports around here (I would say considered small time and/or rural (even with the state capitol located in the area) that the Dems are gonna get the snot kicked out of them. Man, is it going to be interesting to hear the stories from the defeated Dems about what really went on with the Obama Admin to get the Obamacare mess passed (if anything as they sit before a Congressional hearing!).

I think we have seen enough of Obama and his downgrading of the statue of the Presidency. Hopefully we'll see a Breaking News flash some morning indicating how Obama and his last remaining staff scurry towards Airforce One for a last ride as Press Sect Gibbs reads a statement of Obama decision to leave office early. [Hey, a person can dream] lol The look on Biden's face would be priceless.

Hey though, no matter what. Make sure you:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/247ef874f31c.jpg[/atsimg]



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
National Republican Congressional Committee are saying they took a roll of the dice and opened their wallets early, spending heavily in rural, less-expensive media markets


In other words, they marketed themselves to the undereducated. No surprise here; after all, that is their target audience.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by anon72
National Republican Congressional Committee are saying they took a roll of the dice and opened their wallets early, spending heavily in rural, less-expensive media markets


In other words, they marketed themselves to the undereducated. No surprise here; after all, that is their target audience.
Are you stating that rural equals undereducated?
Just seems like such a blanket statement, coming from yourself, it didn't seem right to me.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
Are you stating that rural equals undereducated?
Just seems like such a blanket statement, coming from yourself, it didn't seem right to me.


Generally speaking, yes.

It's a known fact that rural grade schools are not as well equipped to provide as good an education as urban schools. Sure there are rural students that go on to college and earn a degree; however, they rarely return to live out their life in rural environments. So, yes, my statement above was a blanket statement. Certainly there are some well educated adults that live in rural areas; however, undereducated rural residents is the norm.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
Yes, because the Urban areas are full of smart and productive citizens. Just look at the inner city areas of any major city like Detroit, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Buffalo, Columbus, Boston. I grew up in Detroit (in the city, not a suburb) and I got to witness first hand all the "educated" fine citizens there. Heck most inner cities you wouldn't even dare step foot in for fear of your own safety.

I now live in a rural area and the comparison isn't even close.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 
Wow, I was always under the impression that rural public schools had better test scores than their urban counterparts.

Now I know and can spread the word, 'Hey, all you country bumpkins out there. On the whole, you are less educated than the city slickers.'


edit on 2-11-2010 by butcherguy because: I forgot to add Mr. Roll-e-eyes.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Aggie Man
 
Wow, I was always under the impression that rural public schools had better test scores than their urban counterparts.

Now I know and can spread the word, 'Hey, all you country bumpkins out there. On the whole, you are less educated than the city slickers.'


edit on 2-11-2010 by butcherguy because: I forgot to add Mr. Roll-e-eyes.



There is a considerable body of literature (Broomhall and Johnson, 1994; Broomhall, 1993; DeYoung, 1985) that concludes that rural students perform less well than urban students on standardized tests of educational achievement.



Thus, individuals with higher cognitive skills would be expected to have out-migrated from both highly rural and highly urban areas to other areas of the state. This out-migration leaves those areas with resources that are potentially less mobile and individuals who exhibit lower socioeconomic characteristics. These individuals have generally been considered not to place a high regard on education because of their inability to foresee high returns to education within such regions (Broomhall and Johnson, 1994).


findarticles.com...
edit on 2-11-2010 by Aggie Man because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 



Yep, that is exactly what the piece was trying to convey.

Good eye on picking that out.

Me being an apparent poorly educated country boy...... just didn't get that take but now I see.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 
Don't get me wrong, Aggieman! I am sure there are plenty of studies (by city folk, of course
) that prove your point.

It just smarts a little, me being a 'growed up wrong hillbilly' and all. Let's face it, if you had substituted an ethnic group that fit the same educational standards for rural people, you wouldn't have felt comfortable writing it, would you?
Peace
edit on 2-11-2010 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


Studies finding no rural, suburban or urban differences in schooling or that the rural schools perform better:

Academic Achievement in Rural Schools

Are Rural Schools Inferior?

Have access to EBSCO? We can do this all day.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Yay, the other side wins.

I expect in 1 year for unemployment to be at 3%, the entire immigration issue to be solved, and a free chicken in the pot for everyone...hooray...

else, well, they will be ousted in 12...

ride the wave..big smiles, big smiles...

ahh gridlock...what a fun time it will be....be prepared for the torch to be set on you now Reps...time to play defense.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Good, gridlock and bringing the Obama Socialist Empire to a grinding halt.

Works for me.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
I suppose we'll never know the whole truth. This article indicates the Dems spent more on television ads and we know how much America is addicted to television.

Democrats Outspend G.O.P. in TV Ads in House Races

Tomorrow morning when the election results come in, the title of this thread will prove true.



posted on Nov, 2 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


I never understood this fear of "gridlock." Over the past hundred years it's been affirmed time and again the less they do the better off we all are. It isnt until they go off and do something that we all get pissed and this begins a terrible cycle to doing things nobody likes that costs us time and money and in turn forces them to do yet more things.

At this point, seeing as how there is no feasible chance of any of these bastards taking steps to undo any of this crap, endless gridlock is a godsend.

The only things government action accomplish are spending of money, taking of property and killing of people. If these things stop I'd be a very happy person.



posted on Nov, 3 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
The morning after..... ugh.

A blood bath-for some, not so much for others however, a message was sent and it is clear.

We don't like what you have done and we don't want anymore. NOW GET TO WORK.

Still some cleaning up to do with the remaining undecided contest. Be weeks before it is all said and done.

I can't believe Harry Reid won. Something just ain't right there. Sorry.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join