Every day until the election, Slate will offer up one reason to be optimistic for your candidate.
19 days to go:
Today’s Good News for Obama: At Slate, we’ve talked a lot about how much the presidential candidates are spending on ads. But who’s getting more bang for his buck? President Obama’s ads are more effective in changing voters’ preferences, according to a recent study. While Mitt Romney’s ads had little effect on his support, respondents who watched Obama’s ads preferred Obama over Romney 48 percent to 39 percent. And voters who saw both Romney and Obama ads preferred Obama by a 48-41 margin. The study also tested the “Disappointed” ad produced by the super PAC Americans for Prosperity. Male voters who watched the ad supported Romney by 1 percent more than the control group, but there was a 5 point drop in female voter support for Romney. It turns out Romney’s ads aren’t helping him much—and they might actually be hurting him.
TODAY IN SLATE
Justice Ginsburg’s Crucial Dissent in the Texas Voter ID Case
The Jarring Experience of Watching White Americans Speak Frankly About Race
How Facebook’s New Feature Could Come in Handy During a Disaster
The Most Ingenious Teaching Device Ever Invented
Sprawl, Decadence, and Environmental Ruin in Nevada
You Should Be Able to Sell Your Kidney
Or at least trade it for something.
- Texas Lab Worker on Cruise Tests Negative for Ebola as Dallas Hospital Apologizes
- Police Use Tear Gas to Break Up College Pumpkin Festival Turned Violent
- Racist Rancher Cliven Bundy Challenges Eric Holder in Bizarre Campaign Ad
- Supreme Court Allows Texas Law That Accepts Handgun Permits but not College IDs to Vote
An All-Female Mission to Mars
As a NASA guinea pig, I verified that women would be cheaper to launch than men.