McCain Campaign's Ad Spending Now Nearly 100 Percent Devoted To Attack Ads

[Midnight Judges]

The McCain campaign has now shifted virtually 100 percent of his national ad spending into negative ads attacking Obama, a detailed breakdown of his ad buys reveals.

By contrast, the Obama campaign is devoting less than half of his spending on ads attacking McCain. More than half of its spending is going to a spot that doesn't once mention his foe.

As of October 1 -- three days ago -- the McCain campaign's $1.3 million weekly is being broken down as follows, according to Tracey, who stressed that he himself wasn't labeling the ads either "positive" or "negative":

* Nearly half a million weekly is funding the ad called "

," which attacks "Obama and his liberal allies" in Congress for favoring "massive government."

* A shade more than half a million is funding the ad called "Mum," which attacks "Obama and his liberal allies" as "mum on the market crisis."

* Much of the remaining McCain money is funding a spot called "

," which says that "Barack Obama and his liberal allies are to blame" for jobs going overseas. A negligible amount of the remainder is going to a positive spot, the "

" ad.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/mccain_campaigns_ad_spending_n.php

[Destino]

Desperation is a *****.

[DCranon21]

And now the wheels are falling off.

[Burgold]

Well, it worked last time McCain fell behind.

[SkinsHokieFan]

They work. If they didn't, nobody would use them

[TMat184]

They have no chance in hell talking about issues that affect middle class Americans, that's for sure.

[Cooked Crack]

Well, it worked last time McCain fell behind.

This time people are going to care more about the economy than lipstick on lip

[Larry]

Sounds to me like he's not even attacking Obama. He's attacking other people who are in the same Party as Obama, and saying they're the same.

[Destino]

Sounds to me like he's not even attacking Obama. He's attacking other people who are in the same Party as Obama, and saying they're the same.

He is taking every trick Obama uses.

- Obama "CHANGE!"... then McCain, CHANGE!

- Obama "Mainstreet!"... then Palin at the debate, Mainstreet!

- Obama "More of the same!"... then McCain, more of the same!

He's like a bad imitation of what rove was so good at. He attacked the opponents strength, McCain just pretends he thought of it first.

[Larry]

While back, the editorial cartoon in my local paper had a picture of an offshore drilling platform, redundantly labeled "Offshore Drilling", with Obama and McCain clinging to the legs.

McCain is yelling "I reversed my position before he did!"

[Larry]

He's like a bad imitation of what rove was so good at.

Well, the GOP does value loyalty over competence.

[zoony]

From the "TPM" front page:

Why did the Couric interviews go so badly for Palin? As Palin herself explains to Fox, it was because she was "annoyed"

What's Eating Him?

Not just a rhetorical question. What do you think has John McCain so angry? It's like anything could send him over the edge. Look at the video (the McCain vids start about 30 seconds in). Send me your thoughts ...

"My Sweet Coconut"

From the "you can't make this up" file, a McCain foreign policy adviser claimed today that the candidate's decades-long interest in Latin America is exemplified by the fact that he had a girlfriend in Brazil 50 years ago while he was in the Navy:

She Read the Cliffsnotes?

Fox gives Sarah Palin a second bite at the Supreme Court question she flubbed so badly with Katie Couric:

All Negative, All The Time

Nearly 100 percent of the McCain campaign's TV ad spending is now going to attack ads, TPM Election Central reports.

Umm, yah.

p.s. Are there any other sources (of the credible variety) that support the OP? Not saying that the OP is false, just that it's clearly not credible.

[Midnight Judges]

Oh they're definitely a Democratic organization. I'm certainly not posting this as if it were impartial. Although I don't find it that far fetched that McCain would go heavily negative at this point. He's gotta do something.

Problem is, for every add McCain runs that is negative, Obama can run two because he has tons more money.

[Smoot Point Really]

Obama's 1979 policies should be attacked...

[EersSkins05]

Obama's 1979 policies should be attacked...

As should John McCain's 2000-2008 policies.

Point?

[mistertim]

Desperation is a *****.

If this is true (as Zoony pointed out it isn't backed up by more than one source) then I'm thinking the McCain camp is in 11th hour mode. They have officially given up on Michigan, they trail in some other swing states. They have to re-focus on ones they can win and the quickest way is negative ads. It certainly worked for Bush/Cheney in 04. We'll see how this plays out.

Full disclosure: I am an Obama supporter, point blank. But I like intelligent debate on both sides (living in VA, many of my friends are Republicans; no problem with me)

[WVUforREDSKINS]

I bet we see a lot of Ayers, Wright, and that piece of **** Phelgal in these ads.

I say fine. Those are worthy of attacking. But he better not come out with flat out lies like the lipstick ad.

[Smoot Point Really]

As should John McCain's 2000-2008 policies.

Point?

Current economy isn't as bad as 1979... Try buying a house with mortgage rates in the 15-20% range. Inflation was through the roof and people were waiting in line for gas.

I'm tired of the lie propagated by Democrats that this is the worst economy since the Great Depression... It isn't great now, but it isn't Carter.

[TrumanB]

Despite what this liberal source says, McCain has not been running enough attack ads. He needs to dramatically turn up the heat and go exclusively negative at this point. Attack, attack, attack. And then attack again.

[Burgold]

Current economy isn't as bad as 1979... Try buying a house with mortgage rates in the 15-20% range. Inflation was through the roof and people were waiting in line for gas.

I'm tired of the lie propagated by Democrats that this is the worst economy since the Great Depression... It isn't great now, but it isn't Carter.

I don't know. If you listen to Bush and Paulson and a few others, the U.S. was on the verge of total economic collapse and we are facing the worst economic crisis in fifty years. Now, economics is not my area of strength so I don't know if how they were framing this is true or exagerated to try to rally Congress for the bailout, but when you have so many at the top using such alarmist language it ought to be taken seriously.

[scruffylookin]

This election is over.

Barring either a catastrophic gaff on Obama's part or massive unspoken racism that has people telling pollsters that they are going to vote for Obama and then in the privacy of the voting booth they vote for the unqualified ticket, history is on Obama's side.

I heard (I forgot the source) that in the history of Presidential elections, the candidate that has been this far ahead at this point in the race has won the election every single time except once.

That one time was Reagan in 1980.

Of course the biggest difference between now and then is that Reagan was running against an unpopular President who was saddled with a mess in the economy and foreign policy blunders.

Whereas McSame and Ms. "Dinosaurs and People lived together" are the ones who are defending the status quo of a failed economic and foreign policy.

All that said, I don't blame McSame for going negative. That's all he's got. That's generally all the Republicans ever have and much to the detriment of this country, it's worked in the past so they're going to keep doing it.

[JimboDaMan]

Despite what this liberal source says, McCain has not been running enough attack ads. He needs to dramatically turn up the heat and go exclusively negative at this point. Attack, attack, attack. And then attack again.

Because that's what it means when you're a true patriot and statesman, a real maverick and advocate for change.

John McCain coming up small and shrinking before our very eyes. It pisses me off because I'm not really sold on Obama. But McCain tossing his honor and dignity overboard is a tragedy, and with "you betcha" being his pick for #2 there's no way I could vote to put the country in his hands.

[twa]

Has anyone compared the total volume (air time/exposure)of negative ads by both camps instead of percentages?

I would be curious how that compares.

Oh wait the link did indirectly:rolleyes:

the Obama campaign is devoting less than half of its overall ad spending to ads attacking McCain.

Obama is now outspending McCain by nearly two to one on the air -- Obama is spending $2.4 million per week,

Doesn't that mean they are both putting out nearly equal amounts of negative ads?:doh:

[zoony]

the Obama campaign is devoting less than half of its overall ad spending to ads attacking McCain.

Obama is now outspending McCain by nearly two to one on the air -- Obama is spending $2.4 million per week,

Doesn't that mean they are both putting out nearly equal amounts of negative ads?:doh:

:munchout:

[JimboDaMan]

Has anyone compared the total volume (air time/exposure)of negative ads by both camps instead of percentages?

I would be curious how that compares.

Oh wait the link did indirectly:rolleyes:

the Obama campaign is devoting less than half of its overall ad spending to ads attacking McCain.

Obama is now outspending McCain by nearly two to one on the air -- Obama is spending $2.4 million per week,

Doesn't that mean they are both putting out nearly equal amounts of negative ads?:doh:

Actually, no, not by those statements. Obama spending less than twice McCain, with less than half that amount negative, doesn't "nearly equal" McCain. Does it hurt when you twist like that? How about I use this twist - there is not a single positivie message coming out of the McCain campaign ads.