Here is something I don’t understand. Articles like this one in the Washington Times say the Republicans have a huge advantage in cash on hand, and apparently are in a position to out-spend the Democrats by a two to one margin on Senate races. Yet in the races I observe, the Democrats seem to be spending more. I haven’t seen any hard numbers, but the Norm Coleman camp says Paul Wellstone outspent them three to one over the summer. And my sources in South Dakota say Tim Johnson ads outnumber John Thune ads by two to one; yesterday, the Sioux Falls newspaper published a poll that showed a three point lead for Johnson. If the Republicans’ cash isn’t going to support key candidates like Coleman and Thune, what good is it? I think part of the answer is differing tactics; Republican strategists seem to favor last-minute blitzes, while the Democrats believe that money spent early, before public perceptions of candidates have hardened and everyone is sick of political ads, can be most efficient. I fear that experience supports the Democrats’ strategy.
Most Read on Power Line
- Why You Should Be Sympathetic Toward Cliven Bundy
- Today's IRS Documents: What Do They Show?
- Standoff at Bundy Ranch Ends, With Photo of the Year So Far
- The War On Standards Comes to College Debate [with comment by Paul]
- Is Scott Walker on his way to 2016 front-runner status?
- At Dartmouth, Phil Hanlon wants no enemies to the left
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Find us on Facebook
“Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.” Winston Churchill
“Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof.” Inscription on the Liberty Bell