Republican panic sets in over Dems’ financial dominance

March 2, 2008

The NYT noted today that the contests in Ohio and Texas are going down to the wire between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, with Obama hoping to use a fundraising advantage to deliver a “knock-out blow.” Both sides have the resources, though, to oversee massive campaign operations in both states — in just February, Clinton raised $32 million, while Obama is believed to have taken in about $50 million.

And, across the aisle, there’s John McCain, who reportedly collected about $12 million in February — the same underwhelming number he raised in January.

Republicans are not oblivious to the problem.

For Republicans, watching Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama fight for supremacy in fundraising is not just a spectator sport. It is a look into the future, and the GOP isn’t cheering.

Obama and Clinton together raked in as much as seven times as much cash in February as John McCain, the all-but-certain Republican nominee.

The Democrats, particularly Obama, are also developing a broad base of fervent donors whose help goes beyond sending money.

Some Republicans are sounding alarms. “Since the midterm election of 2006, Democrats have had an enthusiasm gap with Republicans,” said GOP strategist Scott Reed. “They have big crowds, raise more money and appear to have more excitement on the campaign trail. Couple this with turnout numbers, which are off the charts, and Republicans are going to have a big challenge in the fall.”

Worse, they don’t seem to have any idea what to do about it.

The Democratic financial advantage has been evident for more than a year. The eight Democrats who were in the presidential race last year raised a combined $253 million in 2007 from individual donors; the nine Republicans raised a combined $207.5 million. Obama’s $36 million in January exceeded the amount raised by all six Republican candidates who were still competing in that month.

The discrepancy was enough to lead Republican National Committee Treasurer Tim Morgan to sound off last weekend in San Francisco during a California Republican convention. Morgan said the RNC has budgeted $150 million for the year, $100 million less than it raised in 2004 when President Bush ran against Democrat John Kerry.

“I look at the Barack Obama campaign in some horror,” he said, noting the Democrat’s totals so far this year. “That should give all of us a pause.”

The financial edge is, of course, about more than just bragging rights. If, for example, the Obama campaign raises more than McCain and the RNC combined — which shouldn’t be too difficult — Obama would likely to be able to seriously compete in states that John Kerry and Al Gore never made a serious effort.

Steve Murphy, a Democratic strategist who advised Bill Richardson’s presidential campaign, predicted that Obama “can extend the contest,” thanks to a flush bank account.

It’s a dynamic Republicans haven’t faced in the modern political era. I couldn’t be more pleased.

March 2, 2008 at 9:38 am

Obama would likely to be able to seriously compete in states that John Kerry and Al Gore never made a serious effort.

I wonder how much of this money (and enthusiasm) comes from these states. More specifically, I wonder how much of this is due to Dean’s 50 state strategy. The Dems have made great inroads in the mountain/west region – an area they had written off for more than a decade. And now we’re seeing record Dem turnouts in deep red southern states.

Add to that, the percentage of cash raised from small donors, and it looks like that ‘crazy, angry, radical’ Howard Dean has it right.

As the old saying goes, You gotta play to win. I’m pleased to see the Dems taking it to the repubs in every county in this country.

“The eight Democrats who were in the presidential race last year raised a combined $253 million in 2007 from individual donors; the nine Republicans raised a combined $207.5 million. Obama’s $36 million in January exceeded the amount raised by all six Republicans.

Then subtract Ron Paul’s $32 million ($28M in 2007), since so much of his support is anti-war.

But if McCain raised 12M in Jan. and Huckabee and Paul raised 4M each, who else got money for Republicans? And why?

There is one reason, however, to discount this good news. The Republicans own the airwaves. You kind of half to laugh when pundits argue that Obama gets a free pass, while McCain’s FEC problems, his flip-flopping, his pandering, his military record, and his temper never even get mentioned.

SR: “Since the midterm election of 2006, Democrats have had an enthusiasm gap with Republicans,” said GOP strategist Scott Reed. “They have big crowds, raise more money and appear to have more excitement on the campaign trail. Couple this with turnout numbers, which are off the charts, and Republicans are going to have a big challenge in the fall.”

CB: Worse, they don’t seem to have any idea what to do about it.

Pssst! Don’t tell them that the current policy of kissing BushCo’s arse and essentially promising four more years of the same damn thing is the problem. Let them figure it out on their own.

Guffaw!

The fundraising advantage is impressive. Even more impressive is that the funds are coming from large numbers of small donors. There is a least the possibility of a tidal wave election this year, especially if Senator Obama is at the top of the ticket. A whole lot of “red” states may be put in play. It looks like the 50 state strategy may pay off in a big way in 2008. By building the infrastructure in “unwinnable” terrain and then running appealing candidates, we are starting to see red states turn purple and purple states turn blue.

But if McCain raised 12M in Jan. and Huckabee and Paul raised 4M each, who else got money for Republicans? And why?

Romney. The supposed standard bearer for the party bosses.

Ah, Mitt. How soon we forget.

But won’t the GOP just use 527s, funded through huge checks cut by individuals, to override this disadvantage? Freedom Watch reportedly has $250 million. Unless I hear about big donor Dems funding 527s at the same rate, I’ll consider talk of GOP poverty to be just talk.

So is the long-term plan of the original Phoenix Group starting to come to fruition?

That question is, for me, the biggest story line of this nomination process…particularly because it is so clear which candidate falls into which group. Sen Obama clearly has the support of the “new Democrats” organization (or most of it, anyway). The Clinton campaign disparages his support amongst the “latte crowd”, but they are the group that has been instrumental in financing the progressive movement. Sen Clinton knows this, because the Clintons were approached to be a part of the make over and demurred/ignored the flirtation.

It is rather amazing that ‘the movement’ could be so close to taking the reins so soon, though primary results indicate that the battle is still close. None-the-less, the power of the new ways…as exemplified by our own, esteemed Mr. Benen…are obvious. They are most obvious in comparing (or rather contrasting) the structure of the two campaigns; the contrast is particularly glaring in regards to the candidates’ website design and function.

Mr. Dean was on board with this idea early…being the first close to major candidate to endorse it. Its no wonder that as the DNC chairman he has pursued strategy like the 50 state idea. But realistically, he must lead the party into the WH to vindicate himself and slay the DLC beast.

(Assuming Sen Obama wins the nomination) The real test will be in the general election against the Republicans. The most interesting nomination process in a generation will give way to the most interesting general election…can the movement and Sen Obama grow into a tidal wave?

Howard Dean hasn’t had the recognition due him for the success of his 50-state strategy. Thank you, Dr. Dean!

But perhaps we should be giving some credit as well to George W. Bush, his administration of fools and scoundrels, the carload of clowns who ran for the Republican presidential nomination, and especially to John “Don’t Know Much About Economics” McCain. It’s going to be the economy, stupid.

TR (5) Ah, Romney. Of course. I tend to think of him as just some of the extras. But that raises another interesting point. Of the $88M he raised in 2007, $35M were from himself. I couldn’t find his ’08 donations.

NHCt (6): Good point. If all your messages are negative, all you need are 527’s.

Republicans are going to have a big challenge in the fall? That has to go into the record books as understatement of the cycle.

“Bambi” McCain meets “Obama-Zilla.” I think the GOPer elite already knows how this one’s going to turn out, so the big question now should be “how long until the angry mob with torches and pitchforks shows up in Crawford, chanting “Kill the Beast?” This is, when you boil it all down, the logical end result of the Bush administration. In wrecking the country, he’s wrecked the party, and all they can do now is “embrace more of the same….”

Re:Republicans,”they don’t seem to have any idea what to do about it.”.

Huh, maybe if they didn’t march in lockstep like brownshirts for the Bush Administration they’d have a little support? Or maybe not.

“they don’t seem to have any idea what to do about it”

They could stop sucking (i.e. being pro torture, hawkish, oblivious that gas is heading towards $4 a gallon, spying on Americans, shredding the constitution, destroying DoJ).

Adding to that, Okie, I think we can also thank Jim Webb. Without him, the good-ol’-boy George Allen would have knocked McCain out of the running, and would be going against us full-throttle, with the combined powers of all three ugly wings of the GOP. I would not want to see what kinds of behind-the-scenes smears that the chauvinist, racist Allen would throw against either of our candidates!

Make ’em defend everything and they can’t keep anything. Not only that but if it goes this way, their presidential campaign will suck the air out of their senatorial campaigns.

I want to see us sweep the table: 65+ Senate, 265+ House, and the White House. The Republicans can retreat to Idaho and live in caves for four years.

The amounts of money involved are obscene, but since capitalist greed and militarism are the defining characteristics of our country perhaps it is fitting that hundreds and hundreds of millions are being bet on the next Decider-In-Chief.

Howard Dean hasn’t had the recognition due him for the success of his 50-state strategy. Thank you, Dr. Dean!

Definitely. And if they had any shame at all Carville and Begala would be too embarrassed to ever opine on politics again after stupidly calling for Dean to be replaced by Harold Ford Jr. a little more than a year ago. Talk about disastrously bad judgment.

Um, didn’t Obama make an oath to pursue an agreement with McCain for public financing? He seemed to reinforce that oath in the latest debate. That would nullify Obama’s fundraising advantage, no?

And if he broke his oath, McCain would (rightly) skewer him for it, and a good deal of what makes Obama attractive to cross-overs would be tarnished. Either way, I’m worried.

McCain would (rightly) skewer him for it — Tamalak
McCain has been trying to, and no one is caring. Of course the problems he’s facing for his attempts to subvert the public funds system isn’t helping him either.

Damn, I missed a /.

Obama took no oath on this, and unlike McCain hasn’t broken the law by signing the paperwork to get public funding, using it as loan collateral and then trying to get out of HIS SIGNED AGREEMENT.

So let’s hope McCain makes a big issue out of this because pointing out that he broke the law probably will lose him lots of votes.

Making honor bound agreements with Repubs isn’t a smart move. How many Repubs are HOLDING OFFICE that have been caught breaking the LAW? (That’s sorta what this election is all about.) Do you seriously think their oath means much?

While some of the candidates have to pass the tin cup to pay for the bills due on a presidential run after they drop out, what happens to the money when the candidate drops out but is financially way ahead of the game in contributions? Hate to uninformed but I don’t know. Anyone?

Sparrow–they usually keep the money for the next run or distribute it to allied congressional and state legistlators.

As has been said above, we have a long way to go. We can NEVER discount the 527’s which gave us Swift Boat fame, or the bought and paid for MSM.

Follow Media Matters (join their daily email summary at http://www.mediamatters.org) to see just how bought and paid for that MSM is.

As Greenwald says, Pssssst…DO SOMETHING.

If I only knew what to do. How do we combat the MSM and 527’s?

RE: #22

O. K. That may be what they usually do, but are there any legal requirements that they can’t just keep it, buy that private island in the South Pacific, purchase a load of Berkshire stock, and lay back on the beach drinking pina colatas?

After comparing Rush Limbaugh to a “circus clown,” the Arizona Republican McCain apologized. “I regret that statement,” he told an interviewer on Fox News the other night, “because my office has been flooded with angry phone calls from circus clowns all over America. They resent that comparison, and so I would like to extend my apologies to Bozo, Chuckles and Krusty.”

Worse, they don’t seem to have any idea what to do about it.

That’s worse? I’d call it normal. Also the best news I’ve heard in years.

I have some suggestions to get them started. They could stop the Kool-aid IV’s, pull their heads out of their fundamental orifices, and take a good long look at the world their stupidity has created.

Oh, right…Then they wouldn’t be Republicans.

Comments are closed.