Home > Politics > Matthew Dowd

Matthew Dowd

Matthew Dowd has been a campaign strategist in races throughout the country. In 30 years, Dowd has worked for Democrats and Republicans, most recently serving as chief strategist for President George W. Bush in 2004.

« Previous | Main

Obama Didn't Buy the Presidency

December 08, 2008 6:10 AM

Confirmation bias is  usually defined as when as humans we seek out information that confirms our held beliefs and ignore facts that run counter to those beliefs.  It affects how we make decisions at many levels.   As human beings we do this because we are more comfortable with hearing things that agree with what we already think.

This bias also exists in how pundits and the media examine what goes on in political campaigns, and it usually means that many times we learn the wrong lessons in our observations.

As I have read recent press reports and analysis of Obama’s spending advantage over McCain in this year’s presidential race, I have noted a constant repetition of what I believe is a myth in politics, and this has been done even by my former colleague Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal analyzing Obama’s advantage in ad spending.

The myth:  Obama won this year’s presidential race in large part because he outspent McCain on television.   By selectively picking facts that confirm a belief, this myth has been told far and wide.   And it is a fiction.

Yes, Obama had a major spending advantage on television.  But as we examine the facts closer, we learn there is no significant relationship to ad buys and vote counts.

This is something I, along with others, studied after the 2004 race, and in that process learned that in a presidential race, paid media buys have little impact on the outcome. 

The only advertising that matters are the spots that get taken up by the media and repeated in a news context over and over again.  Think to yourself about which spots you remember in this campaign.  They are likely the ones that aired very little (Clinton's 3 a.m. ad, McCain's Paris Hilton ad, etc), and these ads had as much recall in places they were never bought as in places they were.

Here are some interesting facts that I hope counter the myth of ad buys in presidential races:

In 2004, John Kerry lost nationally a margin of almost 3 percent.  In 2008, Obama won nationally by a margin of nearly 7 percent.  So the overall national marginal movement was roughly ten points to Obama’s advantage.  Thus, one would conclude that Obama’s movement in states where he overwhelmed McCain with ad spending would be much higher than this 10-point movement, and in states where Obama put little to no ad resources this movement would be less.

Surprise!  That didn’t happen. 

Take the major ten battleground states where Obama put the vast part of his spot advertising buy (such as Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, etc).  In examining Obama’s movement in those states as a whole versus the other 41 jurisdictions you find that there is no difference in movement between those two places.   Obama’s margin rose on average ten points in these ten battleground states, and rose on average ten points in the other 41 states (with DC). 

Hmmmm.  So Obama outspends McCain in those 10 states in total by about a 2 to 1 margin, but has as much movement in places he had no spending advantage.

In fact, some of the biggest movements to Obama were in places no ads were bought locally like Utah and Vermont and California.  And one of the bottom moving states to Obama was Ohio where he had a significant spending advantage over McCain. 

So that is the broad examination of ad buys, lets take a look at some more interesting specific examples to see if the same pattern is revealed.

Two non-target states provide us with some rather interesting information and those are Delaware and Maryland.  Neither state was on anyone list of targets in this years presidential race and resource allocation to those states was very limited.  However, counties in those states are effected by ad buys in target states (some Delaware counties are in the Philadelphia media market and some Maryland counties are in the Washington Dc market).

If one only relied on bias, we would conclude that movement in the counties within the target media markets in those two states would be dramatically higher than counties that were outside those buys.  Lets take a look at what the facts show.

Obama and his allies outspent McCain by nearly 2 to 1 in the Philadelphia market, but there was no difference in vote movement between non Philly Delaware counties and Philly Delaware counties.    Obama got almost the exact same margin jump in both places!   

And Maryland provides even a more stark example of this explosion of the ad myth.  Obama had a 9 to 1 spending advantage in the Washington DC market!   And there was no significant difference in movement for Obama between Maryland counties in the DC media market and Maryland counties in the Baltimore media market where Obama had no local media buys.  Let me repeat – Obama received no extra jump in these DC Maryland counties even though he had a 9 to 1 ad spending advantage over McCain.

So what’s our takeaway?  Pundits and press and consultants constantly repeat the refrain that spending largely determines Presidential race results and that ad buys have a significant impact on results.  This is simply not born out by the facts. 

As I learned, having been involved directly in 2004 and looking closely at this year, the major impact on vote movement in Presidential races have to do most with the political environment, big events and moments in the campaign, and message discipline primarily as it is revealed in news reporting on television, radio, print and the internet.   While ads and spending can more affect down ballot races or less high profile campaigns, in presidential races their impact is minimal. 

I hope this adds to the discussion and maybe help future conduct in and reporting on presidential races.  Beware confirmation bias.   Just because a belief has been repeated over and over again doesn’t make it true.  A good life lesson, too. 

December 8, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (77)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

If you don't like the campaign finance system, then help us change it. But don't fault Obama for using it well.

Posted by: jock59801 | Dec 8, 2008 11:22:47 AM

Mathew Dowd....

You left out the most important points of an Obama Win...

1. The 1st time Voters

Note: Who were never goinmg to vote for a Republican, moreover Mccain & Palin.

2. The often overlooked [Independent & Moderate Votes]

Note: Moderate Republicans & Democrats voted for Obama, as well as Independent Voters.

3. The Various groups overlooked in past elections.

Note: Latino American, Asian American & Bi-Racial America, Voted for Obama.


4. California, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington DC, Washington State, Oregon, Maryland, Connecticut, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Maine, Deleware & Virginia...

Note: Mccain knew he was not going to WIN...

Yet McCain-Palin continued to Campaign Hard in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, NC and Indiana...to no avail.

5. The Anti-Iraq War Vote

6. The Anti-Bush Vote on both the Republican & Democratic side.

7. The Female Vote with Hillaryt Clinton's help, was the largest Contributing Group to McCain-Palin's ticket...

An with Sarah Palin as the Chicken Bone thrown at them, was a Slap in the face of Feminist in this country and all around the Globe.

Kay Hutchison should've been chosen, they still would've lost, but Hutchison would have some effect on female voters...

McCain went with a Hollow log nad sunk his own Ship...

Simple and Plain.

McCain lost the Popular Vote 67 [Million] and the Electoral Vote [365].

He got his A!! Kicked Royally and the Presidency was Obama's when PA, Ohio New Mexico & California Votes were concluded.

McCain was too Old and Palin was a Hollow Log

Posted by: O. | Dec 8, 2008 12:35:58 PM

Matthew, you are so much in the with Obama that is laughable. Obama is perfect for you. Pleasssssse! LOL

Posted by: Mark | Dec 8, 2008 12:42:42 PM

Sorry about the earlier Typos.


Mathew Dowd....

You left out the most important points of an Obama Win...


1. The Young Vote and 1st time Voters

Note: Who were never goinmg to vote for a Republican, moreover McCain & Palin.

2. The often overlooked [Independent & Moderate Votes]

Note: Moderate Republicans & Democrats voted for Obama, as well as Independent Voters.

3. The Various groups overlooked in past elections.

Note: Latino American [67%], Asian American [65%] & Bi-Racial America [85%]Voted for Obama.


4. Obama States: California, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington DC, Washington State, Oregon, Maryland, Connecticut, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Maine, Deleware & Virginia...

Note: Those states McCin knew he was not going to WIN anyway...

Yet McCain-Palin continued to Campaign Hard in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, NC and Indiana...to no avail.

5. The Anti-Iraq War Vote

6. The Anti-Bush Vote on both the Republican & Democratic side.

7. The Female Vote with Hillaryt Clinton's help, was the largest Contributing Group in the McCain-Palin ticket LOSS...

An with Sarah Palin as the Chicken Bone thrown at them, it was a Big Slap in the face of Feminist in this country and all around the Globe.

Kay Hutchison should've been chosen, they still would've lost, but Hutchison would have some effect on female voters...

McCain went with a Hollow log and sunk his own Ship...

Simple and Plain.

McCain lost the Popular Vote [67 Million] and the Electoral Vote [365].

McCain did not get 200 Electoral Votes..

The so called Hero did not get to 200 Electoral Votes !!!

He got his A!! Kicked Royally and the Presidency was Obama's when PA, Ohio New Mexico & California Votes were concluded.

McCain was too Old and Palin was a Hollow Log

Posted by: O. | Dec 8, 2008 12:44:27 PM

Obama had to run against the too powerful right wingers and FOX NEWS 24/7 ! he outsmarted the haters and born again nascar lovers!

Posted by: philosopherkingtomas | Dec 8, 2008 12:51:43 PM

Thanks Matt for the self serving colunm so you can gain favor from the obamas.

Posted by: USA-No1 | Dec 8, 2008 12:57:03 PM

If you don't like the campaign finance system, then help us change it. But don't fault Obama for using it well.
-------------------------------------
jock59801,

Wether you liek or dislike McCain, he helped to put in place some level of campaign finance reform, and then commited political suicide by ACTUALLY keeping his word!

By staying with the public financing, he was restricted, where Obama was not. EVEN THOUGH Obama gave HIS WORD to negotiate with McCain over this issue.

I have no problem with the fact Obama chose the option he did. My issue with it is that he never intended to keep that promise to talk with McCain about it.

Moving forward, if you have groups contributing to candiates in the quantities we are now talking about. How can anyone expect that "REAL CHANGE" will ever happen? You cant just take 750 Million dollars and then ignore those who gave you that money!

The entire cycle needs to be compressed. We dont need primaries going off 10 or 11 months proir to the election. Start holding the primaries in Early May. Get this cycle down to 6 months. Limit the $$ amounts that ANY organization can throw into the mix. The idea that UAW threw hundreds of millions of dollars to ANY candidate with the current conditions going on is just short of criminal!

You think some of those soon to be unemployed auto workers would like to have a cut on those millions now?

Posted by: Mike_C | Dec 8, 2008 1:09:17 PM

Posted by: philosopherkingtomas..


Obama had to run against the too powerful right wingers and FOX NEWS 24/7 ! he outsmarted the haters and born again nascar lovers!
------------

You are Right Philospher

Fox News and Radio are in fact the "Mainstream Media" though Republicans try to imply otherwise.

Obama Defeated the RNC

John McCain and Sarah Palin Robo Calls

Rush Limbaugh

Sean Hannity

Glenn Beck

Dennis Praeger

Bill O'Reily

Michael Savage

An he Defeated Big Time Dominant AM Republican Talking Points Radio..

24 hrs A Day 7 days a Week !!

--------------

Obama Beat The Republican Machine !!

Thanks to all the Republican Propogandist named Above for their steadfast Fear Mongering, that noone bought into but those in the...

Confederate South, The Mountainous, The Ozarks, Upper Appalaician America and Poor Rural Regions of the country...

Those states were going to Vote Republican anyway


Obama did in fact WIN in Virginia, Florida and NASCAR ...North Carolina !!

Posted by: O. | Dec 8, 2008 1:24:13 PM

The story wasn't only about the enormous amounts of money that obama raised - It was because it was under dubious circumstances involving foreign donors, prepaid credit cards, and false names.

Posted by: RespectfulandFrightenedCitizen | Dec 8, 2008 1:35:37 PM

Just need some guidance here!
Anyone out there with some over-sight how it could have been if Social Security Funds were privatised???
Please talk about it!!!

Posted by: james | Dec 8, 2008 1:38:23 PM

The story wasn't only about the enormous amounts of money that obama raised - It was because it was under dubious circumstances involving foreign donors, prepaid credit cards, and false names.The media infatuation with Barack Obama, and its desire not to raise key issues of concern to the American people. Why were there so many people like Rashid Khalidi, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, Pfleger, and Tony Rezko in Obama’s past in the first place?

Posted by: RespectfulandFrightenedCitizen | Dec 8, 2008 1:38:34 PM

Change has come and these are the Reasons why it happened and Money had Nothing to do with it...

When will some of you people stop Moaning and Groaning over a Sound Defeat, Obama Won, Easily.

Your Guy [McCain] was Never going to WIN...

The Times called for a New Leader, an now you have one, now Live with it.

You cannot change it.

Complain for the next 4 years, for all America and the Free World cares...

It won't change the outcome....

Barack Hussein Obama is your New President !!!

I know that Tees Some of You Off..

But who cares at this point..

He's our Nation's New President

An here are the reasons why...


1. The Young Vote and 1st time Voters

Note: Who were never going to vote for a Republican, moreover McCain & Palin.

2. The often overlooked [Independent & Moderate Votes]

Note: Moderate Republicans & Democrats voted for Obama, as well as Independent Voters.

3. The Various groups overlooked in past elections.

Note: Latino American [67%], Asian American [65%] & Bi-Racial America [85%]Voted for Obama.


4. Obama States: California, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington DC, Washington State, Oregon, Maryland, Connecticut, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Wisconsin, Maine, Deleware & Virginia...

Note: Those states McCain knew he was not going to WIN anyway...

Yet McCain-Palin continued to Campaign Hard in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, NC and Indiana...to no avail.

5. The Anti-Iraq War Vote

6. The Anti-Bush Vote on both the Republican & Democratic side.

7. The Female Vote with Hillary Clinton's help, was the Largest Contributing Demographic to a McCain-Palin LOSS...

An with Sarah Palin as the Chicken Bone thrown at them, it was a Big Slap in the face of Feminist in this country and all around the Globe.

Kay Hutchison should've been chosen, they still would've lost, but Hutchison would have some effect on female voters...

McCain went with a Hollow log and sunk his own Ship...

Simple and Plain.

McCain lost the Popular Vote [67 Million] and the Electoral Vote [365].

McCain did not get 200 Electoral Votes..

The so called Hero did not get to 200 Electoral Votes !!!

He got his A!! Kicked Royally and the Presidency was Obama's when PA, Ohio New Mexico & California Votes were concluded.

McCain was too Old and Palin was a Hollow Log

Posted by: O. | Dec 8, 2008 1:59:56 PM

Thank you for this clarifying article!

Unfortunately, you will always have those uninformed idiots who believe that Obama "bought" the election in 2008 just as they continue to insist that Bush actually "won" the election in 2000. They will believe whatever they want and to heck with facts.

Again I say to them...Get Over It Already!!!

Posted by: Dee | Dec 8, 2008 4:06:05 PM

Obama won, and he's doing a great job as we anticipated. He refuses to be labelled and the main reason why we voted for him is because he's very smart and a pragmatist.

For those he didn't support him, dry the tears, get over it and move on as we did with Bush. The world is not waiting for you and neither are we, at the end of four years you get to vote again. Look to future

Posted by: Donna, Kgn Ja | Dec 8, 2008 4:48:04 PM

Sure he didn't buy it... he said he would take public financing but then he switched his position. He then spent $700,000,000.00 running a campaign that outspent mccain by 3 times.....of course he bought the freakin thing!
What I think is so ironic is that barry o was willing to go state to state telling everyone he will make everything fair by "spreading the wealth around", but he was not willing to give mccain 1/2 of his $700,000,000.00 he raised. Typical liberal- always free with everyone else's $$.

Posted by: keepthechange | Dec 8, 2008 5:15:32 PM

My opinion is Obama won because of his consistent, cool manner as the economy went south as contrasted with McCain's impulsive and inconsistent manner. Obama stayed on topic concerning the economy and the war and McCain stayed on topic concerning Ayers and Socialism. Hey! Voters are smarter than pundits and the people running campaigns think they are.

Posted by: msgijoe | Dec 8, 2008 5:22:25 PM

Yea, he bought the presidency. He bought it with 4 million people's money. He bought it with my money and he doesn't owe me anything except being the best leader that he can be for our and our children's future. This is democracy at its finest. There is a huge difference between where he got his money and where Bush and his compatriots got theirs, from big donors and corporations. Bush owed plenty to big money special interets. Obama does not.

Posted by: ch3x | Dec 8, 2008 8:29:45 PM

I was mad that the news media didn't show more Obama ads in my area! The only ads the media played 24/7 were the McCain ads. They played McCain's and Hillary's so much that I thought the news media opened up a special program for helping anybody that choreographed anything AGAINST Obama.

The few campaign ads that I saw presented by Obama, I liked. They were substantive (on the issues) and towards the end got a bit edgy in fighting the republican smears.

Obama did not buy this election with ads! Next, I hope you put to bed the 'large lobbyist' contribution lie that the right-wing conspires. Anybody can see that if more citizens (working citizens) must report who their employer is when contributing, but the FEC allows you to retrieve that data in one sum, it creates the appearance that large corporations made the contributions when the corporations, in fact, often did not support the candidate.

A thorough analysis of the FEC rules would probably show that employees of large corporations are unhappy with current systems and are voting AGAINST their employers' crookedness. But it is the rule that we report our employer when we contribute. That rule violates people's privacy, too.

The way I see it, the FEC seeks a way to help others to target and distort what the people want.

Posted by: Common Sense | Dec 8, 2008 8:53:57 PM

The right is crying now because their Meistger "Karl" Rove's system didn't work. He produced a turnout. He got the public involved. Republicans were ever for big turnouts. A big turnout usually means a republican defeat. Did anyone ever think the message got him elected? Maybe we got tired of smokey backroom deals. Maybe we got tired of under the table negotiations. That was the only way the Republicans could win.

Posted by: dan kolich | Dec 8, 2008 9:28:32 PM

Clint, you must be a Muslim convert. Or so the thinking (as evidenced by Jimbo) goes. Guess I am as well. Otherwise, how could lifelong Republicans such as us POSSIBLY vote against what the party has become?

Posted by: Another Republican Disgusted by the Rovian Delusion | Dec 9, 2008 12:43:48 AM

« Previous Comments | Next Comments »

Post a comment