Putting The GOP Fundraising Numbers In Context

First, Mitt Romney is likely to wind up having raised the most money this quarter... somewhere north of $10M...maybe around $12M. Rudy Giuliani raised less than that. Fred Thompson raised more than $8. John McCain, north of $5.

Give Romney credit: he has an extremely distributed, many-branched fundraising network and a terrific team. He's had a good few months and his nomination strategy is proceeding on course. Rudy Giuliani had no real fundraising network to speak of; that he can still raise more nearly $10M in the third quarter of the year is testament to his status as the national frontrunner. Similarly, $8M for Thompson isn't that bad. Comparing his first quarter take to the millions more raised by Romney, McCain and Giuliani is not really fair: the conditions of the race have evolved in six months and the fundraising field is much less fertile. That $8M is $8M that no other candidate managed to accumulate.

Giuliani and Romney will have enough money to compete through Feb. 5. Thompson has enough to run fully-fledged campaigns in the early states. Romney can write himself a check whenever he wants. The rest of the field is on fumes, money-wise.

And Republicans are raising much less than the Democrats.

Comments

"Give Romney credit: he has an extremely distributed, many-branched fundraising network and a terrific team. "

That is still raising less than half the money of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. But he has broad shoulders and looks good in a suit & tie!

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | October 1, 2007 5:09 PM

Romney:

$50 for that sleek pretty boy haircut

$100 for the hair gel to keep that hair neat

$200 for a nice pedicure with cuticle cream

$250 for a body moisturizer

$300 for a Cover Girl Makeup

$25 millions for changing the image

Desparate attempt to erase all those FLIP-FLOPS with his own millions.. PRICELESS !!!!!

There are some things that money can't buy!

Posted by Mitt | October 1, 2007 5:57 PM

Wow! the flip flop thing is already way old. Romney does no more flipping and flopping than any other candidate. He is by far the most capable candidate and it would be in your be interest to REALLY cheack himout.

Posted by Micah | October 1, 2007 6:02 PM

Romney's support is a lot deeper than the rest of the 1st tier's. It is better organized, mobilized, and committed. Mitt raises funds through more channels and in more ways than any other candidate. And come January 1st, he can donate to or loan his campaign $20 to $50 million that will not have to be reported until February 20th. Combine this with the way the primary calendar is shaping up, and Mitt should be the Republican nominee for the Presidency next year.

Posted by Dave | October 1, 2007 6:30 PM

"The rest of the field is on fumes, money-wise."

You may decide to revise this statement when Ron Paul announces his Q3 numbers.

Posted by Mark Smith | October 1, 2007 6:42 PM

Hillary is holding back her numbers. Why? She's always been so proud of them before. Maybe she's trying to illegally plump her totals by continuing to collect checks today. Maybe she has some Norman Hsu-like friends who can gather whole families and friends networks and Ponzi scheme their way to beating Barack. They are desperate to sew this thing up without any actual voting.

I say this as a peron who earlier in life collected checks for campaigns for pay: as soon as it became graphically obvious that Hillary was collecting the bulk of her money on the last day of each quarter, we all should have known there was a Norman Hsu somewhere helping her. If she does the same thing this quarter, look for another bundler whose secretaries, vice-president and immediate family have $2300 surprisingly available.

Posted by Michael's Mom | October 1, 2007 7:55 PM

I am a McCain supporter (I can still dream, right) but while Giuliani is my number 2, I still think Romney is the one to watch. Despite the flip flops and the rest, as the only governor in the first tier for either party, he has the advantage that he can point to programs, not proceedural points.

Posted by Anthony | October 1, 2007 11:01 PM

"Romney does no more flipping and flopping than any other candidate."

Any other candidate but one.

*cough*ronpaul*cough*

It's a sad state of affairs in American politics when a complete inability to take a firm stance on any issue is justified with "all the other kids are flipflopping too." I'm just glad that there's one candidate in the race who's reminding the American people about the difference between a statesman and a politician.

Posted by Gabriel | October 1, 2007 11:35 PM

He admitted in the PBS debate to flip-flopping on the death penalty. :P

Posted by PnGrata | October 2, 2007 4:12 AM

Romney has been married to the same wife for 38 years, all five children strongly support him, business colleagues from the past 30 years speak highly of him - and are helping raise money for him, he produced the best winter Olympics ever and helped turn around Massachusets fiscal problems, and provided health care coverage for everyone. Sounds like a real flopper to me.

Get real, Mitt is an incredible leader, and one of Bush's biggest faults is his failure to change and adapt, which is perhaps Romney's greatest asset. Romney is constantly evaluating data and is willing to change when change will bring a better outcome. That is not flopping, that is just smart.

Posted by Don Peay | October 2, 2007 8:44 AM

"'Romney does no more flipping and flopping than any other candidate.'

"Any other candidate but one.

"*cough*ronpaul*cough*"

Given that Ron Paul is a nut, the fact that he (apparently) is a rare flip-flopper is no badge of honor.

Posted by John Salmon | October 2, 2007 9:32 AM

Giuliani supporters should be careful of trashing other candidates. Adulterous drag queen Giuliani will not fare will in an negative campaign.

Posted by brooklyn bronx | October 2, 2007 10:34 AM

"And Republicans are raising much less than the Democrats."

This last sentence should get the attention of the RNC. Why are dems raising more money?

I have to believe that conservatives (fiscal and social) are thoroughly disgusted with the repubs. Bush has done a great job destroying the party and the repub congressional leadership, while better than before, is still weak-kneed and fiscally irresponsible.

More than any other in long time, this primary is about ideology and not "image" to conservatives.

It's a mystery to me why Bush is pushing a fairly liberal agenda during the repub campaign. His stances on illegal immigration, border control, the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership, unregulated Mexican trucking in the US, lack of fiscal discipline, continual prosecution of combat soldiers via the military justice system and complete willingness to sell off critical American infrastructure and assets is sickening.

For a repub candidate to get the attention of conservatives they'll have to come out and hit the Bush administration hard, and the democrats harder, as enemies of freedom and conservatism.

And, no, I'm not a Ron Paul supporter.... :) Paul is unelectable. I'm still undecided, but a definite no on Guiliani and McCain - both of whom are too liberal. McCain's penchant for restricting freedom of speech (McCain-Feingold) and support of amnesty for illegals makes him especially obnoxious as a candidate.

Hunter, Thompson and Tancredo are the best non-RINO candidates in the race.

Posted by dbs | October 2, 2007 10:43 AM

The question is WHO would you trust to oversee the finances of the USA? Who is best qualified to make sound fiscal decisions? Who has a proven record of financial discipline/strength in both the private sector and government?

There is only one candidate: MITT ROMNEY.

Posted by Garth | October 2, 2007 12:53 PM

Romney is the brightest, most capable, best business man, conservative track record, service providing, leader, Excellent Governor and on and on and on. He CAN and WILL put up a good fight and WILL beat Hillary. I encourage conservatives out there - (without saying anything negative about the other candidates) Get behind Mitt! He's the best person to lead this country into the next decade.

Posted by Lee Littlejohn | October 2, 2007 3:09 PM

yeah, let's all vote for mitt or rudy..Let's see, they're both for continuing a war that nobody wants. Mitt has to pull money out of his own pocket to stay "in the top tier."

Rudy's been married three times, cheats on his wife, and new yorkers hate him. He also was foolish enough to admit on TV that "it's rediculous to think we were attacked because of our policy." Sorry Rudy, but if you've read any books on the subject, you'd know that is exactly why we were attacked.

For some reason Rudy's tricked some Americans into thinking he's qualified to be president, and if he wins the nomination you can give the White House right back to Clinton. Then get ready for a national healthcare plan that will cause further increasing our taxes!

People, our leaders should be held to a higher standard. They represent US. Sorry, but Rudy and Mitt don't cut it. Why don't we ask them about their views on NAFTA and the WTO? Two organizations directly responsible for Americans bleeding jobs overseas.

The rest of the world hates America's world policy. When are we going to wake up and say enough of the killing? Stop policing the damn world and focus our effort at home!

You can make nasty comments about Dr. Ron Paul, but he is well schooled in Economics and the Constitution. Two things that can get this country back on track! Can you say that about your candidate?

Posted by Robert Johnson | October 2, 2007 3:10 PM

What is not mentioned in this story is that Romney, Giuliani, McCain, Thompson (as well as Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Biden and Dodd) are all members of the Council on Foreign Relations, which ought to immediately disqualify them. Since 1919, the CFR has consistently, and successfully, sought to undermine the sovereignty of our Republic. This includes the UN, NATO, GATT, NAFDA, the WTO and the likely North American Union, on track for 2010. So how can the above candidates serve two masters. This is not good.

I agree with Mr. Johnson. Ron Paul is the best candidate. For American policy, for sound economics, and he is not a member of the CFR. He has my support and my vote.

Posted by zenpiper | October 2, 2007 6:34 PM

Romney is the most electable conservative running. He is by far the most qualified candidate given his experience. When you add in his positive campaign style, good looks, intelligence, and money he really should be unstoppable.

Posted by Kate | October 2, 2007 8:47 PM

Mitt Romney is clearly the candidate for Americans who prefer a stronger economy, more freedom, a stronger military, strong family values, lower taxes, outside-the-beltway thinking, and a track record of innovation and success.

As the only Republican frontrunner to have married only one woman, and having been unquestionably faithful to her, and furthermore, as the Republican with the most integrity, Mitt Romney is the one Republican that Hillary Rodham Clinton is actually afraid of. Hillary Clinton is such a flip-flopper, she makes Romney's growth on the issue of abortion seem like a solid granite mountain of consistency.

Anyone who actually believes that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the most extreme leftist, corrupt, dishonest socialist (yes, I realize that's redundant) Presidential candidate in recent memory, is somehow comparable to squeaky-clean, family man Mitt Romney, is absolutely nuts. In fact, the distinctions between the two couldn't be more clear.

Mitt Romney is the only Republican that Democrats are afraid of, since they can't find any dirt on him. He's Mr. Clean, with a capital "C." Mitt Romney is the only candidate that America can actually trust.

No illegal big-money donors (Can Yu Say HSU? Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barak Hussein Obama, and John "silky pony/trial lawyer" Edwards all accepted dirty money from the felon by the name of HSU), and no involvement in fraud.

Mitt Romney is no trial lawyer or lifelong politician; he's a bona-fide private-sector self-made business success story. He even served as Governor of Mass. only as long as he said he would: one term. The man who turned a multi-billion dollar Taxachusetts deficit into a surplus in a single term. The man who saved a scandal-ridden, money-losing Olympics, and turned nearly a hundred million dollar profit. Mitt is what's Right for America in 2008!

Another thing; Mitt Romney proved that he's a financial genius, and no place in government needs proven business smarts and financial wizardry of the honest kind than Washington, DC. To attempt to paint Mitt Romney, financial innovator, with the diseased socialism of Hillary Rodham Clinton is questionable at best, and downright dishonest and possibly even bigoted at worst.

Don't stoop to empty rhetoric to defeat the primary candidate YOUR favorite candidate fears the most, Gregg. It is clear you dislike Romney, and your article shows it. While it may sound good to the same crowd who claims to be conservative even while they cite Boston Globe articles to back up their attacks against Mitt Romney (where I come from, that would be a compliment!), your article leaves much to be desired out here in flyover country.

Unfortunately there are some people in the pro-life movement who are not willing to accept converts. We must gain converts if we wish to win and restore America’s values to their former brilliance. If you are not willing to accept converts, then we are doomed to defeat.

And we cannot forget that Mitt Romney is the only top-tier candidate who supports a constitutional amendment explicitly requiring that all marriage be between a man and a woman. If we don’t settle the issue and don’t vehemently protect real marriage consistently, the opposite will be the result, and legalized homosexual marriage is what we’re talking about. It is a cop out to say we don’t need a national definition. ¾ of the states must agree to any amendment, so it is a decision by the states, just like the U.S. Flag Protection amendment would have been, had Senator Bennett not come down on the wrong side of history when he cast the deciding vote to deny Americans the chance to ratify the amendment. We don’t leave issues of freedom of speech or religion (not freedom from religion) to the states. Marriage is so fundamental that it is one issue that it should properly rest in the Constitution. Our founding fathers would be turning over in their graves over this issue.

Posted by Law Family | October 2, 2007 9:13 PM

let's also not forget that Mitt Romney is FOR CONTINUING THE WAR IN IRAQ. That is a MAJOR reason not to vote for him.

Posted by Ray Jackson | October 2, 2007 10:30 PM

I guess the tens of Ron Paul fans have decided to make some noise on this blogs. Kind of funny that they think the MSM is propping up the 1st teir candidates and holding back a 3rd teir candidate like Dr Paul. I get that he has a few dozen supporters and he may surprise some people and finish 5th or 6th in the IA caucus and NH primary, but he is still a joke. If he spoke after dinner, he couldnt probably get half his family to be in attendance.

Romney is a proven winner, a turnaround specialist, and has lead throughout his life. The flip flop thing is so old since everybody, including the Dems, have changed there positions. Forget youtube, Romney's record is clear and speaks for itself. I'd bet money he is the GOP nominee, and McGovern (Hillary) will lose just like in 68. BTW, in 1968, Vietnam wasnt popular then either and Nixon still DESTROYED McGovern. Todays McGovern's will have the same fate.

Posted by Husky | October 2, 2007 11:04 PM

Paul "a nut"? The only candidate who can describe why the dollar is dropping and inflation is increasing and is campaigning to address the problem...the only candidate wanting to end an endless money (and blood) pit of a war?

Well then, serve me up some crazy, we need some more around here.

Posted by aaron | October 2, 2007 11:21 PM

It doesn't matter if it is not "fair" to compare Thompson's first fundraising quarter to that of the other candidates. The objective is to have the money to use in the campaign more than the bragging rights for having raised it.

Thompson has considerably less money to spend campaigning than the other top tier candidates.

That is clearly a disadvantage.

Posted by Liz | October 2, 2007 11:40 PM

Here's why I'm voting MITT.

1) He's not a career politician.
2) He comes from the private sector.
3) He appears to have no skeletons in the closet. Translation... No public scandals while he's in office.

Posted by Brock | October 2, 2007 11:43 PM

No one ever even talks any more about what Republicans used to stand for - small government. None of the major candidates even pretends to believe in small government any more.

That's why I'm voting for Ron Paul. Some think he's too extreme, but I say if you want small government, hop on the growing Ron Paul bandwagon, and when government gets to be small enough for your liking, feel free to hop off.

Posted by Conrad | October 3, 2007 1:03 AM

Law Family, the last thing Washington DC needs is "financial wizardry" like you say Mitt Romney will provide. Just look at the balanced budget acts and the phony social security trust fund accounting to see how Washington's "financial wizardry" bankrupts the country.

Posted by Conrad | October 3, 2007 1:07 AM

The primaries are about preaching to the choir, even those who sing a little off key. The general election is about converting the unbelievers (democrats) and fence sitters (independents). No one did this better than Ronald Reagan.

In 1980 Reagan lost only DC, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland Minnesota, Rhode Island and West Virginia. Electoral Outcome: Reagan 489 to 49. What is more amazing is that the Republicans reversed losses from the 1976 race in 15 predominately democrat states including Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio; AND New York, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina and Missouri. FL, MI, PA and OH are all in play not because of many Republican voters, but because these states have comparably large numbers of independent or swing voters. Indeed, that is what makes OH and FL the largest “battleground” states.

Now, Mitt Romney has made great progress getting everyone in the choir singing on the same page. Even more telling is his increasing rise in the polls in states like SC, MO, MI, FL and yes, yes even CA! In almost every case those being polled, after getting to know more about Mitt, respond to his views on defeating the terrorists, competing with Asia, stopping runaway spending, and his support of America's culture and values. When asked why Romney and not another conservative candidate, the answers were again telling. People like Mitt’s stand on strong families, his hard work, and clean living.

No, Mitt will never convince the “Starbucks” crowd in WA and OR, and maybe not CA; certainly not in NY. But in Fly-Over Land people are really fed up with petty, whining democrats and luke warm or less than honest Republicans. This scenario is so close to the 1980 election except for one point: Romney’s poll numbers are better now than Reagan’s were just 8 months before the election.

Sing on Mitt, sing on!

Posted by Ken Howell | October 3, 2007 2:33 PM

Ron Paul just posted over 5 Million raised this quarter -
That is impressive for a bunch of spammers living in their basement... it is on par with McCain's fundraising efforts.

Posted by brettrix | October 3, 2007 3:24 PM

I am sure Mr. Romney is a nice guy and good family man. But where is his conservative record? He will not win against Senator Clinton. We need someone who can.

Posted by James Aragon | October 3, 2007 4:16 PM

Hey douche bag
Ron Paul raised 5 million buckos
SPORT
And that's even with mainstream media not mentioning him

Posted by Royce | October 3, 2007 4:18 PM

Ron Paul is unelectable...Well he has been elected to Congress 10 times he must be doing something right. And the nuts are the homicidal liars that are endorsing the continued massacres going on in the middle east...there are your hypocrits...some of you people are insane.

Posted by Keith | October 3, 2007 5:02 PM

Ron Paul is consistently ignored by the media
even after raising as much as McCain, over $5M in
the quarter, plus he has a natural exponential
growth through the internet. It is easy to recommend
him to friends. His stand makes a lot of sense.

His goal for the next quarter is to double his money
again. See how much he makes once the mainstream
begins to notice him.

Or maybe they already did and he is a person that
is not to their liking?

Posted by Matt | October 4, 2007 12:26 AM

Run Ron Run! Finally a voice of reason in this madness we call politics.

You know we are in a sad state of affairs when people think the federal reserve is a government institution. It's no more federal than federal express. We have given a private bank the ability to regulate control of our currency.

You know we are in a sad state of affairs when it seems reasonable to people to vote for Hilary and her big government ideas where we should give to everyone with their hand out. It's called communism and it doesn't work.

You know we are in a sad state of affairs when among 18 candidates only 1 will promise to bring the troops home NOW. BTW that 1 candidate is getting more contributions from the military than all other republicans combined.

You know we are in a sad state of affairs when we have the police hauling people off to jail and they no longer have the right to hear the charges against them or have access to an attorney. (see ghestapo).

Hang in there Congressman Paul. Ronald Reagan was right about you. We must make sure that you continue to work for the American people. God bless you, sir. Keep fighting the good fight.

Posted by mike | October 14, 2007 6:58 AM

View this and decide for yourself.

Posted by Susan | October 15, 2007 2:11 PM

I agree that Mitt Romney is clearly the candidate for Americans who prefer a stronger economy, more freedom, a stronger military, strong family values, lower taxes, outside-the-beltway thinking, and a track record of innovation and success.

As the only Republican front runner to have married only one woman, and having been unquestionably faithful to her, and furthermore, as the Republican with the most integrity, Mitt Romney is the one Republican that Hillary Rodham Clinton is actually afraid of.
Anyone who believes that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the most extreme socialist candidate in recent memory, is somehow comparable to squeaky-clean, family man Mitt Romney, is absolutely mind-boggling. In fact, the distinctions between the two couldn't be more clear.

And a further Caveat Emptor on the Republican side: Up till now I have been a loyal RNC Member and major donor, and will remain loyal to the RNC, with the following exception: During all the Galas, meetings, and campaign dinners I have attended, I held firm to the 11th Commandment and did not openly endorse nor speak ill of any Republican candidates. After last nights snub at the Presidential Trust Dinner, especially by Giuliani (hope Rudy's so called $15,000 donors have a lot of pull in swinging votes from the Mikulski, O'Malley, Cardin Dems in the Baltimore area, where Rudy went to 'His private fund raiser while snubbing hundreds of Republican Party loyalist at the Trust Dinner, who came from across the United States. Good luck Rudy but you will not have my support in any manner, and surely not from my Grass Roots GOP Teams, ESPECIALLY IN MARYLAND!!, also Pennsylvania and other areas as well, Rudy you have showed your true colors)... And Fred Thompson, the wind has left your sails, and all the hot air will not keep your campaign momentum...Please drop anchor and dock your sail boat!! I am very impressed with Mitt Romney and I openly support him as the 2008 GOP Presidential Standard Bearer. He is a proven and trusted leader, a gentleman of high moral standards and family values. A man who will take the reigns from President George W. Bush and carry on in the truest traditions of the Republican Party. I love, respect and show honor to our President, George W. Bush and look with much pride to Inauguration Day 2009, when President Bush passes the mantle of presidency to Mitt Romney. Support Governor Mitt Romney for President. "MITT ROMNEY IN 08"...

Posted by Jacob A. Hopkins | October 18, 2007 12:52 PM