Will the over 800,000 people in DC for the rally today change Tuesday's outcome?

[cherokeeprogressive]

Suppose the monies expended in travel, lodging, and the multitude of other details necessary to pull this off had been spent on campaign donations, GOTV, and ad buys. Would that have made a bigger difference?

Was money better spent on being close to Jon Stewart than on campaign donations?

[PBS Poll-435]

1. I think the $ was well spent on reintroducting politics to 2008 1st time voters. nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

3. 2008 1st time voters... if all the money spent today were spent putting ads in the latest video game

they're playing on their Wii or PS3, this election would be a total lock.

I work with a 27 year old who had no idea there were miners trapped in Chile. Another (okay, he's only 24) who can't name both of his Senators OR his Representative.

Neither one of them identify with a political party. A few hours broadcast on Comedy Central was completely lost on them today.

[pstokely]

12. Do those 2 even have jobs (or have a good job searching effort)?

Whose paying for their video games if they don't have jobs? So many nonpolitical 1st time voters won't be showing up. The enthusiasm gap isn't with Dems, it's with those typical nonvoters who may have voted for Obama but may not have even looked at the rest of the ballot. Many probably did the same in the 80s with Reagan. They pay more attention to celebrity rehab news

[Chipper Chat]

2. If they vote, yes.

[jillan]

4. I think today's message definitely will get people to the polls.

I think people are so sick and fed-up with the bullshit ads that are being thrown out at us 24/7 & the negativity of the pundits.

It was so refreshing today to see a positive message & the positive energy that surrounded the rally.

[Imajika]

5. Get them to the polls to vote how?

"I think people are so sick and fed-up with the bullshit ads that are being thrown out at us 24/7 & the negativity of the pundits."

So you want them to reject those negative ads? You realize it is actually Democrats running more personal, negative attack ads this election cycle?

The rally made no distinction between which side was at fault, only that fault is floating around out there. It even lumped Olbermann, Schultz, etc in with O'Reilly and Hannity as if they were equally at fault for the nastiness.

What message did the kids come away with? How did it help us?

[jillan]

6. Maybe you should come to Arizona and see who is running more negative ads.

I just watched SNL and every commercial break was 1 - 2 negative ads, full of lies, aimed at the Democrats.
It was non-stop.

Sorry you missed the whole point of the day - and it wasn't just kids that were there.

[Imajika]

7. Nationwide it is actually the Dems running more negative ads...

So who should the kids (and adults) be mad at? It would be nice if Stewart & Co. had at least indicated that the partisans on the left and right are not somehow equal. Lumping Olbermann in with O'Reilly is just wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/28/AR2010102804044.html

"Data collected by the project show that 29 percent of Democratic House and Senate candidates' ads are negative, up from 13 percent in 2008. By comparison, Republicans' share of attack ads has dropped from 28 percent to 21 percent. Further, 35 percent of the negative ads run by Democrats are focused exclusively on policy. By contrast, Republicans were focused exclusively on policy 57 percent of the time."

[liberalla]

8. Was it really 800,000?

That's the largest estimate I've seen anywhere.


VOTE !


:kick:

[jzodda]

9. 800,000? I thought it was 200,000...But the answer is "maybe"

because young people are traditionally not a reliable voting block. They are unpredictable so we do not know what will happen and if they turn out.

[boppers]

10. Young people see through lies.

This has led to an interesting history.

[pstokely]

11. Depends

They'll probably all vote after spending $ to travel there but many who weren't there will stay home when they can vote for free at a nearby precinct. Most of those there aren't considered likely voters by the media by they were probably planning to vote anyway. We need the nonvoters to come out for a decent showing.

[vaberella]

13. The number was supposed to be 215K. ~sigh~

I have no clue what your point is.

[NWHarkness]

14. No, but 800,000 doing GOTV would have. n/t

[pstokely]

15. Jon Stewart is a celebrity, your congresscritter or governor isn't

Obama drew people to the polls through celebrity status. Raygun did the same thing, people who thought has was dumb voted for him anyway. These voters can name washed up celebrities but not their congresscritter

[vaberella]

16. Exactly the point! This is why you have people calling for LadyGaga & Stewart for President.

n/t

[book_worm]

17. where do you get your 800,000 figure?

[GoCubsGo]

18. You make a really HUGE assumption here

That assumption being that those people would make political donations or worked at GOTV efforts in the first place. I know several people who went to the rally. NONE of them would have put the money they spent on attendance into political donations. Nor, would they have joined GOTV efforts. I bet that is the case for a vast majority of the people who were there with them. Whether or not the money spent to bring those people to that rally would be better spent on campaign donations is a moot point, as it likely never would have gone to donations in the first place.

As far as I'm concerned, the huge attendance at this rally does more for GOTV efforts than any campaign donation ever would. It shows anyone who is paying attention that the "enthusiasm gap" on the left is a huge pile of stinky bullshit. Why the hell do you think the MSM is trying to downplay the attendance numbers, and referring to it as a "mock" political rally? The whole rally, from start to end, proved the MSM is nothing but a bunch of fear-mongering, sensationalist liars.

[donco6]

19. Regardless of the number - no.

Though it would be nice to think so.

[marlakay]

20. if they all get excited and tell others to vote

then yes well worth it...

[MadMaddie]

21. Yes! Sometimes it's not the serious actions that get people to act.

The fact that so many like minded people showed up and had a sense of civility and humor could impact those sitting at home wavering between voting or not voting.

Yes! I think the event was positive and constructive versus angry and destructive.

Americans respond to different stimuli and this will impact many. Seriously, the signs alone made my day. Humor, sarcasm and satire all rolled into one event.

We have very intelligent people out there and many are suffering in this economy a bit of light heartedness in this nasty election cycle could make all the difference in the world.