Why did Moore pull TV ads?

Mr. Jensen,

My allusion of collusion may have been a bit much. But given your methodologically unsound analysis, the convenient timing of the your post with Mr. Ambrose's e-mail, and PPP's connections to Perdue's campaign you'll have to forgive the assumption.

I have no ties to the treasurer other than a modest contribution and pledged support. However, your firm has long ties to the Perdue campaign and has engaged in a semi-public feud with Moore's campaign for some time now. Your predecessor is also a staff member for Mr. Ambrose if I'm not mistaken.

Mr. Liam-

Yesterday's post was an expansion, not a 'rehash' on a previous post. Monday I crunched the numbers on PPP's poll and found that Perdue was doing better in the markets with tv than in the ones without tv. Then Survey USA's poll came out Tuesday and Wednesday morning I did the same analysis on their poll, which found the same trend, except much more strongly than in ours. Hence the new post because there was new information.

Also, at the end of my post on Monday, I issued pretty much the exact caveat that you say here I did not:

"It's not a big difference but it shows she might be getting a little more traction with her ads. We'll have to see it across a couple months to really make any conclusions."

Since Mr. Ambrose, who I have never communicated with in my life, sent his email out after my posts your claim that I was parroting his talking points is absurd.

What is your connection with the Moore campaign?

Mr. Jensen and Mr. Ambrose are mistaken.

One month of "meet the candidate" advertising, especially during the month of January, does not often result in a bump in the polls. It usually takes much longer for advertising to do what Mr. Ambose is claiming it should do. These early ads are more about raising name ID than anything else.

Mr. Ambrose sees what he wants to see in these events, understandable as he is running a rival campaign. But Mr. Jensen, less understandably, is parroting Mr. Ambrose's talking points. Yesterday's post is a essentially a rehash of a post Mr. Jensen did last week, timed perfectly with Mr. Ambrose's press release.

Also, Mr. Jensen fails to mention that this "bump" could be nothing at all. What's the margin of error for decided voters in the media markets in which Perdue is advertising? Is it more than the "bump" for Perdue? I bet it is considering the small sample size. But Mr. Jensen doesn't mention that. Doesn't fit in with the Perdue narrative, I suppose.

It may be true that Moore's ads were not popping, I don't know. But I'll let you in on a secret, neither do Zach Ambrose or Tom Jensen.

Richard Moore needs to start over in his thus-far ill-fated campaign for Governor. First, he is being sued in delaying or fudging State Pension Fund reports, probably because he is embarrased to report that his investments with pension money have lost value in Wall Street markets. Second, State Employees, who should be supportive of his management prowess and prior successes, are instead taking out full page newspaper ads against Mr. Moore. Third, his opponent, Lt. Gov. Bev Perdue has run ads on TV that capture her engaging, down-home personality and attentive care for common folks, unlike the bustling Wall Street/Banker look Mr. Moore portrays. Problem Mr. Moore has is that no matter what his consultants design for him, he is STILL motivated by Wall Street Banker values. Let's hope Ms. Perdue wins by contrasting her truth with that of Mr. Moore's.

Bill Robinson 1204 Melton Court Raleigh,NC 27615 919-326-2455