Who got the bigger bang for the buck in PA?

[Exilednight]

Hillary supporters run around and complain about Hillary being outspent three to one, but let's look at what they got for their money.

Obama took a 26 point deficit and narrowed it down to just slightly over 9 points. That's a 17 point gain. I know he spent some where around 20 million, or just over 1 million per point gained.

On the other hand, Hillary spent a third as much, or roughly around 7 million. This equates out to around $350k per point lost.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

1. LOL!

How about money spent per vote? That equation's pretty interesting! :toast:

[C_U_L8R]

2. The Clinton campaign is mired in debt

Hillary got punkd into defending her own turf
and Obama raised the stakes and broke her bank.
A masterful bit of strategy.

[midnight]

6. She can join me and many other Americans unfortunately.

[C_U_L8R]

8. You owe $10 million too ?

yikes... hahaha : - )))

( the taxman cleaned me out... ouch... but i still gave to Obama)

[tokenlib]

3. It's an investment for November..n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. The PA media interests. nt

[Coexist]

5. ha!

[Raine]

7. also Obama's spending in PA meant that Hillary

had to keep pouring money into the state too and to such an extent that it put her not only running on empty but deep in debt. Obama's money was well spent! :bounce:

[kevsand]

9. Obama.

It doesn't matter how much he spent, he moved another step closer to securing his nomination, and that is worth every penny.

Similarly, Hillary's path to the math is now even steeper than it was before, so for all of her expenditures, she got nothing.

So in order to calculate Hillary's bang for the buck, you have to divide nothing by how much she spent. Zero divided by anything is still zero.