This morning’s Washington Post confirms some of yesterday’s speculation here about Barack Obama’s fundraising efforts.
Internet donations to Obama have slowed, forcing the campaign to expand efforts to raise money from high-dollar donors in order to meet budget projections:
“It’s one of the reasons why the Clinton people are so important,” said Kirk Wagar, Obama’s Florida finance chairman. “Most of us have beaten our Rolodexes pretty badly.”
Yet Obama managed to botch an appeal to his donors to help retire Hillary Clinton’s campaign debts at a major New York fundraiser Wednesday night, forcing him to return to the podium after he had concluded his speech, recorded music had come on and he had taken up shaking hands on the rope line. And Obama’s donors seem disinclined to help Clinton, even though it would help more money flow to Obama in the long run.
The WaPo also reports that the Obama campaign, combined with the Democratic National Committee, hopes to have raised $450 million by Election Day. The Wall Street Journal reports that John McCain and the GOP are projecting a unified budget of $400 million for their general election push. That $50 million gap may not be as large as some might have thought from the Obama hype floating around the media recently.
Should Obama fall short in November, hindsight may be unkind to his decisions to reject public financing and discourage independent expenditures by groups outside his campaign and the DNC.
Hillary ended (an acknowledged) ten million in the red. Now the O!, celebrated daily for the last eighteeen months on how much money he’s raised, shows a dip in fundraising and the media covers it like the pebbles in front of the avalanche.
What’s the burn rate difference between the winners and the losers? In truth, they spend it faster than they get it, regardless of what party or how successful their candidacy is.
I don’t think these campaigns approach even the efficiencies on display in the DoD procurement process. But by the time they arrive in office, they and all their advisers are certain that they know how government spending works… because they spent the same way campaigning.
Get public money out of campaigns.
The long primary campaign was damaging. A lot of money was raised, but a lot was spent. Some sources are likely tapped out now, and some sources may be reluctant to give to the Obama campaign due to that very long primary. There is a month and a half until the sprint begins.
That $50 million gap may not be as large as some might have thought from the Obama hype floating around the media recently.
That gap may be in the other direction if the amount spent during the primaries is taken into account. The real race is on in a month and a half – how much will be left in each parties coffers for the main event? That is what is important now.
I get regular begging letters from the O! campaign… the last a sort of lottery thing where a small donation gets one in the running for a backstage pass to Barry’s open-air rockstar acceptance speechifying.
Call me cynical, but after the revelations of Clinton bundlers and with no requirement to report donations under $100, why is there certainty that O!’s 1.5 million donators are really 1.5 million individuals?
The Democratic mess in Pennsylvania …
This involves the payment of bonuses to state employees who engaged in political activities.
I think this removes Gov. Ed Rendell from any VP list, or at least it should.
The parties thought getting the nomination process started and ended early would set them up for more time to raise money for the fall campaign. All it’s done is provide more incentive for a determined, bitter-ender candidate to damage the eventual winner and then hit him up for money to retire the debt she ran up trying to destroy him (which, apparently, she could have saved all that money and just stood back and watched).
That’s the trouble with all these “fool-proof” plans. Fools are diabolically clever.
I’m not sure the parties had much to do with it. The contest to have a “Me first!” primary sort of forced them into it.
Hmm. As I watch this, I have an idea: let’s start the next Presidential election campaign in March 2009. With only a moderate amount of luck we can bankrupt the bastards who are financing this crap.
Regards,
Ric
Clinton DebtiPhone Success Adds To Obama BurdenApple Marketing Plan Targets Baracky’s Base
Hmm. As I watch this, I have an idea: let’s start the next Presidential election campaign in March 2009
It will begin on November 5, 2008.
Forced? To defend Iowa and New Hampshire’s claims to be first?
That’s kind of like someone trying to force me to defend my dog’s favorite #2 corner against being used by squirrels.
“t will begin on November 5, 2008.
– At 9:30 am on Pennsylvania ave.
“It will begin on November 5, 2008.”
Whoa, MayBee. Clinton ’12 started on June 6th, 2008 (or May of 1991, depending).
With the President’s approval rating below 30 (and still 3X that of Congress) one might think that pols would catch on to the fact that “more does not mean better”. That assumes that pols actually think, though – a proposition without evidentiary foundation.
Maybe, just maybe we can move off of the idiot Iowa caucuses and the diorama of politicians dropping trou and bending over to offer submission to the Ethanol boondoggle.
I’m not holding my breath.
Why can’t we hold primaries on three, stinkin’ days? March, April, and May, 1/3 each and split them up more or less along the lines of the current schedule. I’m so sick and tired of Iowa and NH, having about 1% of the population, being kingmakers (OK, OK, queenmakers too!) while those of us in later states get to pick our noses because “it’s all settled.” Now the finances are all screwed up because one party had a close fought contest. If I were a Hilary supporter (Hah!) I’d be pissed at the amount of people that were wailing at her to get out of the race as early as possible.
Our primary system can be found in the dictionary under both “dumass” and “self-destructive.”
It will begin on November 5, 2008.
Of course it will. What do you think John McCain was doing over the last eight years? How many local and county events did he attend? How many state party events did he attend?
I don’t know, but my semi-educated guess is that he was working the party starting about the time that George W. Bush sewed up the nomination.
It was a poltical Verdun, BJ. And they got exactly what they worked for.
“With only a moderate amount of luck we can bankrupt the bastards who are financing this crap.”
I’d give (someone else’s) left nut to see Soros on the gubment teet.
The video where Obama forgot to mention Hillary was really funny though. The NYT said he “circled back and covered her at the end of his remarks.” Bull. Shit. He was off stage, had finished glad handing, and was on his way to Scarlett Johansson in the limo. Friggin Stevie Wonder had been playing for about a minute. It was bad.
He might as well have just swaggered back up to the side-stage and hollered, “If any of you brought your checkbooks, could you please give this angry, vindictive bitch a dollar?”
It was Obama’s payback for her FISA vote.
It was Obama’s payback for her FISA vote.
*Charles Bronson voice* “This ain’t over.”
Did I say political Verdun? That was the first war. Now we are in the second war, and it will be a political Stalingrad.
Mikey,
Obama went and fucking -flat out- humiliated Hillary in public. Just shamed her. The MSM has glossed it, but, sweet fancy Moses, pimps treat their “bottom bitches” better than that!
It’s a fact. I saw it in “American Pimp.” Which was on cable. The STARZ chanel. Late at night. So, you know, it has to be true.
Best documentary evah btw.
“…and it will be a political Stalingrad.
– More like a political Berlin with the Femnazis in the audience.
And I know the word “Channel” has two “n’s” in it, but a pimp would spell it like I did.
LYBD, the problem with doing something like that in politics is the beast is never actually dead. He just gave her and her die-hard supporters another reason to sabotage him, another reason not to donate to the general campaign.
He just went out and deliberately insulted a large identity bloc that he needs to win over in order to win. That was so much the opposite of brilliant that I can’t think of an analogy.
Mikey,
My point exactly. It’s on. Obama had Hillary fly to New York on HIS plane. Why? Because a few days prior HIS plane had “mechanical problems” and was forced to make an emergency landing. It’s the equivalent of the King making the vindictive, ambitious Crown Prince his “food taster.”
Denver is gonna be a helluva thing.
The two bits I find interesting in all this are:
1) Superdelegate votes are pledges, but not firm commitments. Hillary, AFAIK, has not released her committed delegates, so the nomination isn’t axiomatically in Obama’s hands. Granted, it would be a hell of a hurdle since her machine has been dismantled, but it isn’t impossible, given the party staffing.
2) Hillary, now back in the Senate, is effectively continuing to run against Obama unless she mirrors his votes and positions on everything. If he goes centrist, she can go back left and do something like vote down FISA. If he tries to recoup the left, she goes bipartisan.
From where she’s at, it’s blind easy for her to jack him but royal, even if only by being weak in her support. And if she’s really, really, evil and vindictive, she might be able to snatch the nomination out from under him.
“Denver is gonna be a helluva thing.”
For all his Chicago political background and his supposed smarts, Obama is pretty dense.
Go back and read Hillarys! “suspension” speech.
Then consider that the outcome of their “reconciliation” was that Hillary proposed he help her cover ten million in debt. What’s that amount to, for the Lightgiver? A week, maybe two, of normal net fundraising, even if he doesn’t schedule events specifically aimed at meeting the request?
Obama has declined not only to honor his opponent, but has for all intents gone out of his way to belittle and humiliate her core supporters. His campaign is some mixture of arrogant, incompetent, and petty… leaning heavily toward arrogant.
I think that we may be adding “August Surprise” to our political lexicon.
Mrs. Clinton, shown the proper deference, could have shown up at the convention to vent some platitudes and gotten on with planning for 2008, content to watch how O! did on run… that’s not going to happen now. She is without a doubt even more aware than O!’s crew of just how horrible a candidate McCain is for the Republicans. Nope, she’s not done. And she’s still got weeks to move the pieces.
Denver will burn.
Planning for 2012 – pardon.
Off to the mountains now.
Senator Obama’s problem isn’t lack of fundraising but grossly wasteful and stupid use of the money he raises. The Clintons are no better, Senator Clinton’s campaign was a festival of waste and ill use of funds.
I hope Obama’s supporters haven’t run out of change! ;)
I have wondered abou this stuff myself. I am not sure how it was done, but I am pretty much convinced that a very large slice of Obama’s pie was delivered by George Soros.
It just doesn’t compute for me that a candidate who can’t even win the popular primary vote is smashing all records for fund raising.
Something smells here.
I have stated before (American Thinker subsequently quoted by Mr. Limbaugh) that Obama’s victory was an anti-Clinton backlash. Now that the witch is dead Obama’s funds are going to dry up. The traditional media prefer the generic Democrat but they still maintain a core integrity. I have been struck by the WAPO, the LAT and others who have taken off the kid gloves in re Obama. This promises to be one of the more interesting of the elections that I have followed since 1952.
but they still maintain a core integrity
You don’t listen to NPR do you?
Happy, thing is, “integrity” can be a morals-neutral word. Like if you’re watching a WW2 movie and the good guy (an American or Brit) is kidnapped by bad guys (Nazis) and taken away in a U-boat, you kind of hope the sub’s integrity holds up against the U.S. Navy’s depth charges so the good guy lives to defeat the bad guy.