With Florida's Republican presidential primary just a day away, it's worth pausing to appreciate how it's the mirror opposite of what we saw in South Carolina. A week ahead of the primary in the Palmetto State, Mitt Romney enjoyed a big lead, only to see it evaporate as the election drew closer. In Florida, Newt Gingrich was on top a week ago, and it now appears all but certain he'll finish a disappointing second.
We have a fairly good sense of why Romney's support fell in South Carolina -- a couple of weak debate performances undermined his standing -- but how did Romney bounce back quickly in the Sunshine State? Two words: his wallet.
Gingrich argued on ABC yesterday that Romney is likely to win this primary because he's "carpet-bombing with negative ads," financed "with Wall Street money." This may sound like an excuse from a bitter candidate, but Gingrich has a point.
According to some final spending numbers shared with TPM by a Democratic media observer, Mitt Romney's lucky number in the final push to the Jan. 31 primary here is five.
As in five-to-one: that's the ratio -- just about -- by which Romney and his allies have outspent Newt Gingrich and his allies on TV in the Sunshine State. The narrative that Team Romney is pushing is that of a new-and-improved candidate, battle-hardened after his South Carolina woes, and sharpened as a candidate by having had to outsmart Newt Gingrich.
The Dems think these figures suggest something else: that it's not Romney who's winning votes in Florida, but the size of his wallet.
Estimates vary on exactly how much more Romney has spent in Florida, but the enormous gap is hard to miss. TPM's figures say pro-Romney spending outpaced pro-Gingrich spending, $15.3 million to $3.4 million. NBC News totals put it closer to $16.9 million to $4 million. As of Friday, the New York Times pointed to a $15 million to $2.5 million gap.
We'll know more about the precise figures once the dust settles on the race, but the larger point is hard to miss: Romney is thriving because he has the resources to buy an impressive win.
In a general election against a well-financed incumbent president, this financial edge will largely disappear.
Leave a Comment:
It'll be interesting to see what percentage of the Wall Street bailout they spend to support the party that pretends to be so much against it.
Hmmm. Sounds like Citizens United has an unintended consequence. :)
This consequence is completely intended by the corporations that backed Citizens and other suits about corporate personhood. They want to be able to "buy into office" the candidate that will best represent their interests.
The weekend 2-3 link deep buzz in the financial news was that Wall-Street and Giant Corp and the GOP establishment all want Romney and don't want Gingrich. (One story claimed that the market would nose-dive if Gingrich was the nominee)
I don't care what billionaire backs Gingrich, they don't have more money than corporate america can bring to the table.
I fully expect Romney to win just by outspending any opponent.
A question for the general election, to my mind, is with two well funded and corporate backed opponents, does it reach a point where the money become not so important? That is, if the money is equal on both sides, will some other factor (likability, for instance) become more important?
Evidently the only way money makes its way back into "the system" is through political campaign ads, so let's let 'em do it!
Spend, baby, spend!
who needs votes and supporters when you have money the new free speech.
Ditto.
Obama has about 3x as much as Mittnick.
"In a general election against a well-financed incumbent president, this financial edge will largely disappear."
With SuperPac money out there, I wish I could be this confident. Fingers-crossed.
(Steve, I was expecting your blogging over here to be sporadic given your other responsibilities associated with the show. Kilgore is great, but I've alreay missed you at WM, and I'm thrilled that you're up and running at your normal pace. For those who don't know Benen's work, you're in for a real treat!)
Hey Steve! Gingrich is too easy to bring down, Romney is still lying his ass off...yesterday on the stump he said that in 2008 Obama promised to visit Kim Jung-Il, Castro, and Ahmadinejad in his first year!
But think of all the jobs Mitt's avalanche of ads is creating. He will turn the economy around, one misleading attack ad at a time.
John Roberts, Sam Alito and their three allies on the bench will prove to be the biggest threat to a free and liberty-minded people in our lifetimes, and on into our children's children's lifetimes!
Citizens United will live in infamy along with the Dred Scott decision, Plessey v. Ferguson, and in a parallel way, the Indian Removel Act! -Kevo
The Dems have the chance to prove that money cannot buy elections. They need to wallop Walker in Wisconsin, but not with ads. Dems can usually command more people on the ground than the Republicans. Ohio showed the Republicans that money cannot buy the election, but they think Ohio's referendum was a fluke. Once the idea that money cannot buy elections is destroyed, the Republicans will panic. Personally, I think if Walker loses by a significant majority, it will touch off a free for all in the Republican party because some of the incumbents that are in swing districts and some safe districts will be fighting to keep their seat.
just think of Ryan, and Duffy i think is another WI rep. the one said his 174k a year wasn't enough money to do his job.
Dems should go out of their way to beat Ryan. The Republicans are laying the groundwork for eliminating SS and Medicare so they keep repeating the lies about privatization. Dems need to insure that these programs are still toxic. And Ryan should be the poster boy for what happens to Republicans who try to sell eliminating or privatizing the programs.
Yomeone needs to do a Youtube add about the GOP liebarry.
And the crowning achievement -> Bush eliminated depression era banking regulations then outlawing Mexicans who stopped paying rent when they fled the country, thus collapsing the banking system.
Robme's little speech in Nevada implies a real possibility that a few wealthy people used the GOP to collapse the economy on purpose in order to increase their own wealth.
And, of course, this would only work if wealthy people could use radio and TV to convince people the GOP is doing the opposite of what it is claiming to do.
"Occupy" Movement Will Hurt Obama. As much as I share the beliefs and values of the "occupy" movement I'm afraid that it will hurt the President, esp. if it turns violent. I remember 1968 very well and I saw how Nixon and Agnew were able to tie the war protest and inner-city violence to the Democrats. The code word term was "Law-n-Order" . They were able to spin the phrase into fear and hate mongering and pin the onus for the happenings on the Democrats--very successfully. The media paid little attention to what they were saying--only what was "happening". Private property is ultra-sacred in America and regardless of the reason, anything that jeopardizes it will have negative consequences. And if it can be tied to Obama?????? Given their history I'm very apprehensive of how and what the Rep's will do to Obama. (Remember how one conservative PAC was able to influence the nation by changing a medal winning war-hero into the opposite? And turning an alcoholic, AWOL druggie into the "best" choice for America?) As much as I dislike them we have to admit they are excellent at playing to fears and spinning the truth. If these protests become violent, they will be tagged on the Dems. The news media will be more than happy to have a front page action story and very little sympathy will be given to the bloodied protesters. Newt or Mitt will coin 5 or 6 phrases and label Obama. They will have another set of code words to cover up what they really are
There is a lesson in the the voter push-back against the initiatives of Red Tide Republicans. If the voters are half asleep, you can sandbag them with a minimum of fuss and tons of money. But if you piss them off by stripping union rights, gutting education and other services, passing fascist emergency financial manager laws and paying off your backers with tax cuts, then all the money in the world won't buy you nearly as much as it did previously. We've seen this time and again with 2010 Republican govenorships - we'll see it with the presidential election.
One might also point out that among the retired and more elderly population of Florida (I am of course over-generalizing here), the television is almost always on, especially in the time leading up to Wheel of Fortune.
It does tend to lose attention, I am told, around 5:30, the time when most senior specials kick in at the local restaurants and diners.
Hey, BTW, is Steve Benen always gonna carpet bomb Maddowblog? Bring back Laura, Tricia, Will and Kent! And all the other folks too!