A report came out yesterday stating that from Sept. 28 through Oct. 4, the Obama camp spent $17.8 million on ads compared to a measly $11 million between McCain and the RNC combined. Juxtapose that to a similar week during the 2004 election, when John Kerry and George Bush spent just $18 million (heh, just…) and a couple questions come to mind. For instance, why has the election process come to be so costly and what will candidates in the next election have to spend in order for us to choose the lesser of two whatevers?
The study, by the University of Wisconsin Advertising Project, breaks down the ad spends by state and compares them to the ad spends of the 2004 election — also by state.
“Ten of the fifteen states where both candidates are advertising were won by Bush in the 2004 election,” said Ken Goldstein, professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and director of the project. “The campaign is being played on the Republican side of the field this year.”
Another notable note; nearly 100 percent of McCain’s ads were negative in nature whereas (in our assertion) Obama has tended to stay in the positive arena. However, Obama is outspending his opponent in almost every market, begging the question; how sad is it that massive amounts of money are being spent on delivering pointless messages that do more to kowtow to potential voters’ needs than actually explain a candidate’s plan?
Click continued to see where this is going.