Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FredZarguna
"As I said on another thread, any number being "leaked" about internals is a number that comes directly from the campaign staff or even the candidate himself. I don't care how well connected the source is. It's psyops, plain and simple."

They wouldn't leak it to The Guardian if they didn't want it published. (If they leaked it to the NY Times or WaPo it would just be faxed to Chicago.) I think it's probably to encourage the GOTV effort to bring reluctant Romney voters in. I think it would be dangerous to claim a lead of, say 3-4 points, even if that's what they see.

73 posted on 11/05/2012 1:53:32 PM PST by Sooth2222 ("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: Sooth2222
They wouldn't leak it to The Guardian if they didn't want it published. (If they leaked it to the NY Times or WaPo it would just be faxed to Chicago.) I think it's probably to encourage the GOTV effort to bring reluctant Romney voters in. I think it would be dangerous to claim a lead of, say 3-4 points, even if that's what they see.

This

75 posted on 11/05/2012 1:56:16 PM PST by Gulf War One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

To: Sooth2222
Well, unless I misread this, it was exclusive to the UK Telegraph, not The Guardian, which would do the same thing as WaPo or NYT straight to Axelrod and then down the memory hole.

I agree they want it published. That makes it a press release, not a "leak." And at this point in the campaign, a press release from anyone is something to be skeptical of.

That means the most likely US readership is Drudge's, which means the target is us. That tells me that the number they've decided on "leaking" is the one most likely to encourage the troops and make sure they turn out. I do not believe under any circumstances they would "leak" a number better than +2%.

Axelrod has been telling CEO's "it's in the bag" and that has a number of FReepers fretting. Really? Why? What do they expect Axelrod to say? "We're losing. Send us more money!" CEO's contribute to winners in anticipation of consideration. They aren't going to bundle for 0bama if they think he's done for; that would be wasted money to no purpose other than pissing off the next administration.

88 posted on 11/05/2012 2:06:59 PM PST by FredZarguna ("Post Hoc, ergo propter hoc," is no way to reason through life, son.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

To: Sooth2222
Well, unless I misread this, it was exclusive to the UK Telegraph, not The Guardian, which would do the same thing as WaPo or NYT straight to Axelrod and then down the memory hole.

I agree they want it published. That makes it a press release, not a "leak." And at this point in the campaign, a press release from anyone is something to be skeptical of.

That means the most likely US readership is Drudge's, which means the target is us. That tells me that the number they've decided on "leaking" is the one most likely to encourage the troops and make sure they turn out. I do not believe under any circumstances they would "leak" a number better than +2%.

Axelrod has been telling CEO's "it's in the bag" and that has a number of FReepers fretting. Really? Why? What do they expect Axelrod to say? "We're losing. Send us more money!" CEO's contribute to winners in anticipation of consideration. They aren't going to bundle for 0bama if they think he's done for; that would be wasted money to no purpose other than pissing off the next administration.

89 posted on 11/05/2012 2:07:14 PM PST by FredZarguna ("Post Hoc, ergo propter hoc," is no way to reason through life, son.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson