[paul51]

mitt spending his money in a place like illinois makes more sense than zero spending his in texas

[dalereed]

If obama performs in the second debate like he did in the first Romney won’t have to spend another cent to win!

[gleeaikin]

See plenty of ads on network TV for both candidates in the VA/DC/MD market. The most devastating for Romney is the one where they repeat the 47% remark and the sentences both before and after which really don’t do much to soften it.

[okie01]

Hank, you’re in Texas. There is no point in either Romney or Obama buying ads in Texas. Romney going to win the state...and that’s that.

[FenwickBabbitt]

I live in Florida and am happy to say that I’ve seen numerous Romney commercials on the cable channels. I’d say they’ve been about two times the number of Obama ads in my area. I’ve also seen tons of both Connie Mack and Bill Nelson commercials.

I’m really glad that Romney’s apparently only using his ads in a targeted, strategic manner. As far as bang for your buck, local ads on a wide variety of stations are the best choice, since we have the electoral college. Why would his ads need to be seen in Texas, or California, or New York? That might just mean he would have less money for targeted ads in Florida, Ohio, and Virginia. Remember 2000—even just swaying a small number of extra voters in the key swing states may be much more important than accruing a larger popular vote nationwide.

[freekitty]

I havent seen ads for any candidates including challengers except for Obama for any office. On the road to slavery?

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Romney is spending his money in states that are at risk of voting Democrat but have a large enough independent and conservative constituents to vote Republican. Here in Massachusetts I hear no adds. I live in the state where 47 percent are lost to Obama. But I hear several times a day adds run in New Hampshire which should go to him if he pays attention to them. I expect he is not spending too much in states that are certain to go to him.

His bigger problem is exposure. The left wing TV and newspaper propagandists don't give him any time. He hasn't learned the art of speaking to the people through the propagandists as Reagan did.

[Vendome]

You don’t live in a state they are fighting over.

For instance, I live in California and there are no ads being spent here.

We don’t matter, as the state will resoundingly go for Obama.

[Republican Wildcat]

Obama has been running ads nationally on cable networks ... I agree it is frustrating to see so many Obama ads without any Romney ads in response.

[UltraV]

You live in Texas. We are not a battleground state. Why should he waste his money? He’s not Obama. Just because Zero is stupid enough to run ads here doesn’t mean jack.

[stevem]

We get a few ads in Minnesota, although I'm not sure this is the best place for him to spend money. Still, Mpls/St. Paul TV and radio reach well into western Wisconsin; and Duluth covers much of northern Wisconsin.

Romney has a decent chance in Wisconsin.

Republicans and conservatives have accused Romney of much. Time will tell if it's justified. No one can sensibly accuse him of incompetence.

[Clyde5445]

I would also add it looks like Romney’s money is being invested in ths ground game and the GOTV in the swing states.

[BobL]

I don’t watch TV (just hang out on the web), but most people do. My thought has always been that a presidential candidate SHOULD advertise at the national level, as well as the state levels.

While it’s true that winning Texas by 15 points instead of 25 points gets one the same number of electors, being up in Texas by an extra 10 points brings up one’s national average a point or so and makes the candidate top number look more respectable. It also helps tremendously down-ballot to win a state by an extra 10 points.

I don’t know the cost of advertising nationally, but I suspect that there’s a significant savings at the per-viewer level, just because of the efficiencies of scale. So, the cost to reach 100,000,000 or so voters in the swing states is probably not any higher by advertising nationally, than by going into each market. The one downside with national advertising is that the same ad is seen by everyone - so if you’re Obama and want to talk about all of the high-paying union jobs that you’re saving, that may go over good in Detroit, but not so well in West Virginia (where they’re being forced to shut down coal mines). So you make the ads of the more “feel-good” type for the national market, but you STILL runs the ads.

[rabidralph]

There’s a house on fire in my neighborhood! Is your house on fire, too?!!!!

[only1percent]

They are running Obama ads in California to increase turnout of low information Democrat voters and reap their votes for the public employee union positions on initiatives.

[stuck_in_new_orleans]

Christ......why would Romney spend money to run ads on FOX? Cmon. Think a little.

[bert]

There are ads from our East Tennessee TV stations being broad cast into South West Virginia

They began on October 1

[arthurus]

We are finally starting to get some Romney ads hereabouts, not yet so many as the kenyan ads. What is interesting is the disappearance of the Obama yard signs.There is no vandalism around here at all and it is a very conservative area but there were obama signs spotted here and there even only here and there in black front yards. Now in the route I travel to/from work the obama signs have all disappeared. I do not see a single one. The disappearance predates the debate. I drie through a neighborhood that is about 1/4 black.