This end of a post at Talking Points Memo today made me laugh:
If Romney loses Iowa after having spent $1.8 billion there and then loses in his backyard in New Hampshire he’ll be in bad, bad shape. The horrid press over the following few weeks would likely kill him.
(ed.note: I had meant the reference to Mitt’s $1.8 billion in spending in Iowa to be an obvious bit of sarcasm at Romney’s expense. But it seems Romney’s efforts to buy the Republican nomination have become so notorious and proverbial that many readers are asking if it’s really true. So, no, I believe his spending is well below $1.8 billion. But he wants it really bad and there’s still a day left. So who knows.)
$1.8 billion sounds plausible? Using what counting system?
Elsewhere on the web today, a Des Moines-based WFAA reporter says Romney has spent $4 million on TV ads; also today, Fred Thompson [disclosure] aide Rich Galen writes in a column for CNS news,
according to the Professional Guessing Class, [Romney] may have spent upwards of $8 MILLION here
If Romney has in fact spent $8 million, which doesn’t sound like a bad guess, then he would have to spend 225 times that in order to spend $1.8 billion. CNN says all the candidates combined have spent $40 million on TV ads; I’d be surprised if there was a billion dollars worth of TV time to be had in Iowa in an entire year.
If Romney really dropped that much money in the state, Iowa could practically retire, and hey, maybe accede to another state or system its coveted first-in-the-nation status. Which would probably be a good thing for everyone. Except, of course, Iowa.
P.S. For example, see this from First Read:
MOUNT PLEASANT, Iowa — A woman who famously switched from volunteering for Clinton to Obama has changed her mind… again. …
“Probably I’ll caucus for Richardson,” she said after Edwards spoke. “My guess is he won’t be viable, and then I’ll probably scoot right over to Edwards.”
Are Iowans really so serious about their vote? Or are they spoiled and self-indulgent? In another state, I’ll bet voters would not feel so entitled, political observers would not ascribe such mythical status to their choices, and just maybe, subsequent states would have a bigger say in the primary process.
Alas, as my former Hotline colleague Reid Wilson explains, attempts at reform might be about as easy to properly implement as the Fair Tax.
P.S. After some consideration, I actually wish I had called this “Josh Marshall’s Readers Are… Not So Good With Numbers.”
I was one of those who read that on TPM and sent mail querying Josh. I just figured maybe he misplaced a decimal point or wrote “billion” when he meant “million”. Silly mistakes do happen sometimes – earlier today, TPM was running a headline saying Romney was criticizing Huckabee for appearing on Letterman tonight.
@Ralph
That makes sense, I’m sure that was the case for some. Nevertheless, I remain amused that Josh makes it sound like some non-trivial portion of his readers found “1.8 billion” a credible figure.
William – If that’s the case, we’re into triple-mind-reading territory. You’re guessing at what Josh meant by commenting on readers’ thoughts when they missed the joke in the first place. Maybe “$1.8 billion” just doesn’t sound facetious enough. All corners of the media have been hammering the “Mitt is spending a whole pile of money” meme kinda hard, after all.
But hey, it allows you to call liberals stupid, which is always a perennial favorite!
Well, $1.X billion is what the entire 2004 cycle cost — presidential and congressional. So, one candidate in one state with no major media markets… I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
And don’t worry, I generally find that stupidity is evenly distributed across the ideological spectrum.
Damn. Pretty soon you’re talking real money. And it might be 5 times that this year, with the open presidential seat.
And that’s before Bloomberg decides to play, if he ever does.
Now THAT will support the media through the writer’s strike, don’t ya think?
(And heaven help you if you can figure out how to post through WordPress’s identity protection without navigating away from the page and returning! :-)
Campaigning is a business. Some innovators drive it, certain shareholders always expect growth, and it can get ruthless. I’m a supporter of American capitalism, but the political market is always broken somehow.
The best thing for us all right now that Iowa doesn’t predict the final nominees, and it continues to lose clout. Not that I’m sure we know how to pry it out (or New Hampshire) and replace it with something better.
Bloomberg won’t play, but heck, if he did he could spread out his print advertising and prop up what’s left of the newspaper industry. There’s one guy who could pump $1.8 billion into Blogads.