.

Should Romney Buy TV Ads in Pennsylvania Now?

The Romney and Obama campaigns haven't spent much money in Pennsylvania so far but there's speculation that might soon change

 

Presidential campaign watchers are speculating that Gov. Mitt Romney's team may start running television ads in Pennsylvania outside of the expensive Philadelphia market, according to a PoliticsPa report.

Neither presidential candidate has been on the air here since August.

What do you think? Is the time right for Gov. Romney to get on the Lehigh Valley's airwaves? Tell us in the comments section below.

President Barack Obama lost his strong lead in the Keystone State after the first presidential debate, although polls this week show him regaining some ground.

The risk, reports Jonathan Martin of Politico, is that a Romney offensive in Pennsylvania could be met with a crushing response by the Obama campaign.

Here's more:

  • State Candidates Could Dominate Airwaves in Pa.
  • Should Mitt Romney Pass on Pennsylvania?

 

 

 

Bob Porsavage October 25, 2012 at 06:06 PM
Romney should hit the airwaves as I believe PA is now winable. Not in Philly or Harrisburg or Pittsburg. Those folks are blinded by what's good for them, rather than the country!
Larry Delhagen October 25, 2012 at 09:41 PM
I will make an observation and then see what people think. Clearly, 4 years ago, the country was hungry for change, and after 7 years of war fatigue, an endless media assault against Bush and the financial meltdown, McCain had zero chance of being elected. That was made even more obvious, in my observation at least, by the campaign signage that was displayed in the summer/fall of '08. By my very rough count, Obama bumper stickers were 2 or 3 times more prevalent than McCain and Obama yard signs slightly greater in number as I traveled about the valley. This fall, I have noticed not only a stark decrees in bumper stickers and yard signs in general, but also about a 50/50 mix between the two candidates from Easton to Alburtis and Slatington to Coopersburg. Does this portend anything? I don't know. Clearly though, the enthusiasm for Obama is not what it was in '08. Has anyone divined anything from the number of signs, or a comparison of same from 4 years ago? It could very well be that if Romney chose to push here in PA, even at this late date, he might take it.
Larry Delhagen October 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM
typo: decrease...not decrees
louis kootsares October 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM
talking to people at football games,gunshows,government employees,professionals,working people,citizens,retirees,basically everyone who pays their own way,they want romney,i guess that leaves the retarded,freeloaders,and the other near comatose to vote for ayatolla obahma i hope we still out number them
Mark Jamison October 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM
I hope you learn to form a sentence and use punctuation.
louis kootsares October 26, 2012 at 01:16 PM
nope when i feel like it or if i do not feel like it i will choose not some riff raff
man_knee October 26, 2012 at 01:50 PM
In 2008, there was no way a republican was going to win no matter who ran. That was especially true when Obama showed up. He was a break from the norm; young, very well-spoken, and enthusiastic preaching about change, and the nation was captivated because not only was he all those things, but now there was a chance for the 1st African-american president in history. I fell for it. 4 years later, it's become clear that while the guy talks a great game, he just can't put up the numbers. In 2012, he's not so exciting, his game-talk is less what he's going to do and more why he couldn't do what he said he would, but will do if he gets another term, and now that we've had an African-american president, there's no history-making involved here, we're just voting for a man, not a cultural phenomenon anymore. This time, I have to go with Romney. He's just more experienced in the area we need the most, creating jobs. Their both wealthy men (everybody who has ever or will ever run for President will be richer than us), but Romney is wealthy because he was successful in business. Obama wrote a book. I'm not saying Romney is the 'best' choice, but he's the 'better' choice. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. In a dead-heat election like this, it's pretty clear the nation is polarized, split right down the middle. A couple hundred years ago, a smarter man than me said 'United we stand, divided we fall,' and it looks like we may see if there is any truth in that statement.
M Cole October 27, 2012 at 05:21 PM
Was that English?
Keith Best October 27, 2012 at 05:37 PM
All you need to know is if you want the economy to come roaring back, you'll vote for Romney/ Ryan.
Hannah Goldestein October 31, 2012 at 09:32 PM
What a silly and ridiculous comment. Are you trying to tell us you can read the future? Do you have a little crystal ball and some animal entrails? The Massachusetts economy was worse off after Romney was governor than the day he took office. No roaring happened. So there's no reason to think it'd happen if he was elected President, which is increasingly unlikely, given Obama's continuing lead in the critical swing states of Ohio, Nevada, and Wisconsin. As for Pennsylvania, Romney doesn't have a prayer here.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »