The New York Times points out another indicator of Democratic strength and corresponding republican weakness: the two top Democratic campaigns are going on air in the February 5th states (even John Edwards is considering a multi-state ad buy), while the piteous republicans, alas, remain mired in Florida. The advertising person in me sees a beautiful branding opportunity.
A coast-to-coast onslaught of presidential campaign advertisements began rolling out this week, with Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton already spending millions on commercials in Feb. 5 nominating states on a scale more reminiscent of a general election.
The spots represent something of a test of the messages that each believes could eventually register with a national audience.
The scope of the ad buy is national in scale both geographically and in terms of expense.
All told, the Clinton and Obama campaigns are each believed to be spending at least $2 million a week on television advertising in the days before what is being billed as Super Tuesday — Mr. Obama’s cable advertising bill alone is an estimated $1 million — sums so large that it could make it harder for them to afford advertising in states with later contests if the nomination is not settled that day.
Specifically, both campaigns are on the air in California, Connecticut, Georgia, New Mexico and Utah. In addition, Obama is running spots in Alabama and Delaware, Clinton in Arizona, Massachusetts and Missouri. Take a look at the New York Times video here.
John Edwards is in on the game.
John Edwards, who has yet to win a Democratic nominating contest this season, has advertised on television this week only in South Carolina, which has a Democratic primary on Saturday, but officials said the campaign was considering advertising in California, Georgia, Kansas, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.
That's a total of thirteen states - plus a national cable buy on CNN and MSNBC by Team Obama - that will be getting a Democratic message for two weeks, unfiltered by the Broderite media, bringing the pitch for our values and our candidates into the living rooms of John and Jane Q. Public. In scale and scope, the cumulative ad buy for Democratic candidates is roughly comparable to a new consumer product launch. The distribution of the ads spend is also compelling - it's been a while since, say, the residents of Utah or Oklahoma have been hit with campaign ads by any Democrat running for President.
From a branding perspective, this is solid gold. Both Clinton and Obama are running ads that focus on the shortcomings not so much of each other - Ad Age, in a piece titled Clinton's a Lying Liar Who Lies, rips one spot that has been pulled by the campaign - but on those of the incumbent administration. The total ad spend - $4 million a week, annualized over $200 million - is comparable to that for a top-line consumer product. By way of comparison, based on 2006 figures, Coca-Cola spends (.pdf) only four times as much for its entire family of products across all media, in total.
Shed a tear for the republicans: they, alas for them, don't have the money to compete.
An aide to Mr. McCain, who had struggled to raise money until taking in $7 million in the new year, said the campaign was daunted by the prospect of advertising in multiple states before Feb. 5. The cost of a statewide television buy in California alone could approach $5 million a week, the aide said.
Senator McCain, as what passes for a republican frontrunner these days, had better get used to having these problems; given that he's opted into public financing, his funding imbalance against whomever emerges as the Democratic nominee is here to stay until his party convention on September 1st.
Strictly in terms of marketing our product, Democrats are already winning.