Big Money Will Be Spent on Advertising in Lead-Up to Pennsylvania Vote

Breaking Records
Eight weeks ago, the presidential primaries were in Iowa. Six weeks from now, the next big state, Pennsylvania, will vote. In the longest primary season ever, it’s not surprising that we’re also seeing record amounts of money being spent on advertising. The Democratic race, especially, is making local media markets very happy. Thus far, the campaign has exceeded $210 million in broadcast, not including cable.

Not to be outdone, Pennsylvania will welcome the more than $40 million that is estimated for the weeks leading up to the vote. This dynamic level of media spending is driven by two key points:

1)Hillary Clinton is leading by double digits in most polls and needs to protect her #1 spot.
2)Senator Obama raised $55 million in February alone (vs. $35 million for Senator Clinton), giving him the ammunition to chip away at her lead.

For Clinton, the Keystone state is crucial. She needs to maintain momentum, especially after her minor setback in Mississippi. With PA Governor Rendell in her corner, the campaign believes that it can carry the state and move on to the next big day (North Carolina and Indiana) with the wind at her back (sorry Guam). It’s the boxer’s strategy: you can get knocked down a few times in the early rounds, but a strong finish will sway the judges’ final tally.

For Obama, he needs to take the next big piece of real estate on the map and show that he can carry a big general-election swing state. The Obama crew knows that the more time people spend with him on the campaign trail, the more people like him. So he’ll be traveling around the state kissing babies and spending his shekels on a record-breaking ad blitz. If Senator Obama can take PA and then North Carolina, he should have the delegates and the velocity to send Clinton home.

So what type of ads will we see?
For Hillary, I hope she continues the ad hominem attacks. The more beat up the winning Democrat, the better for John McCain. But if I were her campaign adviser, I’d still urge her to hit him hard on the issues, but tactfully. She should applaud him for bringing a level of energy to the political process that is sorely needed, but vociferously challenge him on his record. I'd attack his very foundation as an aisle crosser and a political transcendent. In his short time as senator, the Illinois senator has exclusively voted the party line and has never stood up and put his neck out when it mattered. Are these the qualities we want in our next president? She needs to show Democrats that the answer is “no.”

Barack's people will urge him to stay above the fray and act presidential in his advertising. In other words, vanilla. But it’s a long time between now and Pennsylvania and Hillary will use as much of her war chest as possible to undermine him. I can only hope that he is lured into a ticky-tack mud wrestling match while John McCain is refueling and raising money. If I were advising Obama, however, I'd tell him that he needs to articulate his vision into a tangible platform that moves beyond the soaring rhetoric. The doublespeak of his message is that while he speaks the word, "hope," he paints a desperate and victimized picture of the American people. Real change doesn't come from the government, it comes from the people. He hasn't yet shown how "change" means anything more than government bureaucracy. If he cannot give substance to his message and depth to his vision he will become an easy target as people tire of his empty oratory.