Ditto.

Agreed.

No contest. Though I'm hoping none of the $1,000 second place prize money goes to Portland or Multnomah County Democrats.

This is why you guys are going to lose again. The right answer is to spend the $10,000 on television in Medford to reduce the Republican majority in Southern Oregon. Spending $10,000 in Pennsylvania or on Portland tv is like spitting in the ocean.

Well, that's true, Jack -- 10 grand ain't nothin' these days, and it will go further in Medford than it will in Portland. But I'd say 1 Pennsylvania swing vote = 10 Oregon swing votes at the moment. If Portland could carry Oregon narrowly for Gore, it will certainly do so for whoever that guy is who's running against Bush.

Hey, slightly OT, when am I going to get to chair "Multnomah County Democrats for Jack Roberts"?

But I'd say 1 Pennsylvania swing vote = 10 Oregon swing votes at the moment.

That's assuming that Pennsylvania will win/lose by the same NUMBER of voters.

If $10,000 can reach, say, 5000 voters, that's around .3% of Oregon's voters, but only .1% of Pennsylvania's voters (2000 election returns).

So, in other words, you stand to gain a bigger piece of the pie by going after Pennsylvania, but you're more likely to actually make the difference if you send those dollars to Oregon.

But if you can reach 5,000 people in Oregon (presumably with TV), won't you reach 15,000 in more densely populated Pennsylvania?

That's right. $10,000 in OR goes a lot further than in PA. Plus, in 2000 the number votes that seperated Bush & Gore in OR was much closer than it was in PA.

Gore won OR by 6765 votes (720,342 to 713,577.) Gore won PA by 204,840 votes (2,485,967 to 2,281,127.)

Gore carried OR by less than 1%, but carried PA by nearly 4%. This is not to say that the margins will be the same this time. And yes PA has more EC votes. But I would argue that you'll get more bang for your buck in OR in terms of swinging the electoral outcome. And I know we've got great troops on the ground here who will implement the resources wisely.

With that much more of a population than Oregon, I would assume that the cost of advertising is quite larger than in Pennsylvania. What they should do is buy as much TV time as they can. To hit us Democrats, it could be run anytime, but if you wanted to hit the Republicans, I would say run it during the news or sometime when they are not out at their rat race jobs. This time would probably cost more though.

Jack Roberts' message translates to: rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. I've been astounded to see the force & trajectory (upwards) of national Republicans in the last month or two. This $10,000 does seem like similar incompetence.

Two months & counting -- down?

One interesting fact is that a Pennsylvanian is advocating Pennsylvania's cause, but a Californian is advocating Oregon's.

What could be more perfect?

But if you can reach 5,000 people in Oregon (presumably with TV), won't you reach 15,000 in more densely populated Pennsylvania?

I was also assuming TV, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't TV advertising rates normally set roughly based on how many viewers they have (as well as the "quality" of viewers... based on age, race, etc.)? I'd imagine $10,000 would get you roughly the same number of viewers in any market?

But I don't know for sure!

Professor Bogdanski,

Long-time (grateful) reader, first-time commenter, this post caught my eye... I moved from my home in rural PA to attend L&C Law in '91, and I stayed in Portland for a decade. I hope both states go strong KE04, and I appreciate both Kos and (Philly-man) Atrios immensely (and both arguments on this point are well taken). But In the final analysis I voted to dump the cash into PA because I have greater confidence in OR voters to make the right decision without much regard to canned campaign political advertising. Both states are seriously politically divided, especially between their urban and rural areas, but having spent significant portions of my life in both, I think OR voters are morely likely to make independent and informed electoral choices. Naive, perhaps short-changing Pennsylvanians, but my personal observation is that Oregonians (both native and transplanted) are a more attuned and independent-minded crowd, on both sides (wingnuts notwithstanding). Pennsylvania swing voters seriously drank the Kool-Aid a few years back when they bought into heinous 11th-hour attack ads against Harris Wofford (who would have been a freakin' great senator), regretfully electing Rick Santorum in a close election. You know the same (or worse) slime is comin' down the 'pike in a big way in PA (and of course elsewhere), and the same thing could happen again in a close election. Any efforts to rebut the lies or get the message out, I think, are more needed in the Keystone State, given its electoral payoff, (and FWIW, PA results will be reported 3 hours before OR's, despite our different voting methods). My $0.02...

David Yeager
just happening to be in Bosnia & Herzegovina
www.scoutradio.com

This thread may be tapped out, but one more comment. Read the poll website more carefully. The money in question would not go to TV ads. It would be given to the coordinated campaign to support voter turnout efforts. This mean producing literature or hiring phone bank workers. 10 large goes nowhere on the tube.

(And that's why it would have more impact in OR. Smaller margin. Bigger bang.)