« The Little Campaign That Could | Main | Mitt Romney's Feb. 5 Strategy » Other Campaign Finance Nuggets31 Jan 2008 02:57 pm ** Barack Obama raised $32 million in January... and managed to find 170,000 new donors. That's a jaw dropping figure. The silence from the Clinton campaign suggests that they haven't raised that much, or from nearly that many people. More evidence that Obama has cracked the movement-building code. ** Rudy Giuliani ended 2007 with a little more than $11 on hand -- not as dire as one would have assumed. Comments (25)
can you smell what the Barack is cooking? 
did you hear how obama was rated as the most liberal senator in 2007. Even further to the left than socialist Bernie Sanders... hmmm.. now hes attempting to HISPANDER in California by highlighting his consistent support for drivers licenses for illegal aliens, despite the fact that states who previously issued them like Michigan stopped doing so because the resulting bureaucratic nightmare did not produce tangible public safety benefits.
MoveOn.org is polling its membership today to determine if either Clinton or Obana can reach a 66% threshold of support. If either of them does, the organization will throw its considerable resources behind that candidate. This has the potential to be a very big deal, although my guess is that neither of them will generate that level of overwhelming support.
He's cracked the movement code? C'mon, that's a little biased. And saying the silence from the Clinton campaign means something....let's wait and see before jumping to conclusions.
I think that the $32 million is HUGE given that apparently they made the most money AFTER the NH loss. I think that the fact that HRC is rapidly being reassessed by democratic voters. And as McCain comes into focus as the likely Republican nominee I would argue that this helps Obama in many respects: he can command Independents and moderate Republicans and he is a less divisive figure in the party and the nation. Plus two huge Clinton scandals are breaking today: the ABC walmart story and the Bill Clinton Kazakstan thing which will suck up air they need and remind people about what the Republicans love best about the Clintons: their ability to create scandal.
JFK do you have data on HRC's numbers of unique donors? I couldn't find them on a quick search. They're probably there in the FEC database but I gotta get back to work... Far as I can see Obama's unique donors totalled around a quarter million mid-07 and 470,000 at the end of 07. The current donors push the total of unique Obama donors to 650,000, a nice rate of increase. Maybe some kind person will retrieve this and make a chart. -- With all due respect, I'd be happy if MoveOn just sat this one out!
I just received a donation email from Obama. As of today, they are up to 230,000 NEW donors in Januray alone, and have set a goal to crack the 250,000 by midnight tonight. Contribute!
Things are sinking quickly for Hillary. The latest Gallup poll has a four-point race nationally and California's latest survey is even closer. Clinton can't just hope that she pulls off New York and Tennessee at this point -- the latter being the only state with no sign of tightening.
The rate of increase is unlikely to be sustained but suggests we could end up with a million unique donors to Obama '08, a good sign in terms of intensity, willingness to volunteer and help. Hokey though this sounds, giving even a small contribution makes you feel like a little stockholder. Has anyone run typical ratios of contributors to a candidate to voters for said candidate? Just to get a sense of the proportions...
They need the money to pay off all the Rezko contributions. Even if they do it by dribs and drabs. Now the corrupt Iraqi billionaire Nachmud Auli has been drawn into that Terror Cell of Chicago South Side corruption along with Barack H. Obama, Antoin Rezko, Ali Ata, Milorad Blagejovich, and Adolph H. Axelrod. Hopefully the Patrick Fitzgerald & Co. FUMIGATING SERVICES will rid the city and the nation of this VERMIN, once and for all.
ironic heading into tonight's debate that we learn of Barack's fundraising numbers and the new Gallup tracking poll showing HRC's lead down to 5 b/c arguably Barack's high water mark until IA was in April right before the first debate when it was announced he'd raised more Primary money than HRC and the polls showed HRC leading by only 4 or 5 points. These debates have been HRC's firewall. It will be interesting to see if Barack has matured enough as a candidate to win the debate and to break his old glass ceiling
Things are sinking quickly for Hillary. The latest Gallup poll has a four-point race nationally and California's latest survey is even closer. 1) Clinton and Obama have been close in national polls for a while now. This is nothing new. 2) Obama has yet to win the white vote in a single primary. Not a good sign. Also, one can't rule out the influence of the Bradley effect. I'm not saying it's as powerful as it may once have been, but I don't think you can confidently state it doesn't exist. Don't be shocked if Obama underperforms relative to the polling on Tuesday. 3) Clinton is absolutely dominating the Latino vote, protestations by Obama surrogates to the contrary. 4) The worsening economy plays to Clinton's strengths. 5) Snubgate is hurting Obama with female voters. So, perhaps, may Teddy Kennedy's endorsement. 6) Rezkogate is becoming a serious headache for Obama. 7) The seasoned Clinton campaign seems to have gotten the Bill eruptions under control. When he is under control, he's a proven closer, as New Hampshire has shown. 8) Obama is drawing huge crowds. But, in similar fashion to New Hampshire, people who can't get away from their day jobs (much less shell out $500 checks to political campaigns) are more likely to show up and vote than college kids cutting class to attend rallies. Advantage: Clinton. 9) Obama has been sharpening his attacks. That's a risky strategy, as it detracts from his pure-as-the-driven-snow image. Surely this shows their internal polling tells them they're unlikely to emerge as the top delegate gainer on Tuesday. My guess is that John Edwards's exit from the race has unsettled them. 10) John Edwards's lack of an endorsement speaks volumes. Nobody expected him to endorse Clinton. But nobody expected him to refrain from endorsing Obama. I think we'll be able to look back in a few months' time and conclude Obama lost the nomination the day of his triumph in South Carolina. For by finishing third in the state of his birth, Edwards's campaign came to an end, making it a two person race. And that, in turn, was a development hugely beneficial to Hillary. 11) McCain's rapid emergence as the presumptive Republican nominee widens the experience gap between Clinton and Obama. Democrats are facing the sobering prospect of running against a titan of the foreign policy and defense establishment. Clinton is much better suited for such a race than Obama. Indeed, the "dual presidency" so many pundits have decried doesn't look so bad when the extra constitutional portion of the presidency happens to be the country's single most capable diplomat. 12) Contrary to Broderesque analysis, it's not good enough for Obama to "keep it close" on Super Tuesday. He needs a win in the delegates sweepstakes. Why? Because it is the Obama campaign that has made momentum its calling card. Finishing second to Hillary Clinton will hurt that momentum -- probably fatally so. Because, with the GOP settling on McCain, Democrats will understandably start to get antsy to settle on a candidate. If it is Hillary who has the momentum and delegate lead on February 6th, they'll begin to close ranks behind her, just as the GOP is doing with McCain right now. By Valentine's Day we should know what the November matchup looks like. 13) Intrade still favors Hillary, and in fact has barely budged sensed South Carolina. The money, at least, is pretty skeptical of Obama's chances.
Marc, shouldn't that be the Giuliani campaign had about 9 and 11 dollars on hand?
Obama is generating a lot of momentum and quickly erasing Hillary's leads. If this continues, he could even finish ahead of her on February 5th. The Latino vote is being oversampled, plus I expect Obama's Latino numbers to improve as he advertises in Spanish media.
Obama is generating a lot of momentum and quickly erasing Hillary's leads. If this continues, he could even finish ahead of her on February 5th. The Latino vote is being oversampled, plus I expect Obama's Latino numbers to improve as he advertises in Spanish media.
Obama is generating a lot of momentum and quickly erasing Hillary's leads. If this continues, he could even finish ahead of her on February 5th. The Latino vote is being oversampled, plus I expect Obama's Latino numbers to improve as he advertises in Spanish media.
Jasper: Has anyone ever told you that your so-called "analysis" is incredibly simplistic blather that no one is interested in reading? Just askin.
Has anyone ever told you that your so-called "analysis" is incredibly simplistic blather that no one is interested in reading? Just askin. Apparently you're interested in reading it, or else you wouldn't be able to form an opinion on it. Just sayin'.
Uh...Marc has anyone ever told you that you are a tool? Thought so. Tool.
Jasper I guess the white vote didn't count in Iowa right... Or losing by 2% in NH with the overwhelmingly white population there...Another low info voter...
Jasper I guess the white vote didn't count in Iowa right... Or losing by 2% in NH with the overwhelmingly white population there...Another low info voter...
The Rudy - $11 thing is cracking me up. He raised 50 million, and had ONE delegate. Too funny for words. As for Obama's 32 million - YOWSA!!
Jasper I guess the white vote didn't count in Iowa right... Or losing by 2% in NH with the overwhelmingly white population there...Another low info voter... Iowa was a caucus, Ann -- I specifically wrote "primary." Obama tends to have greater strength in caucuses, where the lower turnout partially counters his narrower appeal. Another reading comprehension-challenged blog reader.
I also got that e-mail key bits of which I'll reproduce below. Close reading suggests that the January 224,000 total includes people (like me) who gave both in 2007 and in January 2008, so total unique donors may still be around 650,000. Still hoping someone will do the comparables for HRC. ----------- In the hours before Iowans went to their local caucuses four weeks ago, the 500,000th person donated to our campaign. ... so far in January alone, more than 224,000 people have given to this campaign.... These 224,000 people are giving whatever they can afford. More than ninety percent of our donors this year have given $100 or less. ... I can testify that they've been using donor lists effectively as organizing tools.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Rudy Giuliani ended 2007 with a little more than $11 on hand -- not as dire as one would have assumed.
Really? I would've thought he'd at least have enough for a case of beer and a pizza, myself...
Posted by gustav | January 31, 2008 3:13 PM