Monday, October 20, 2008
Why John McCain Still Drives Conservatives Nuts...
On Fox News Sunday, McCain had this to say about Barack Obama's amazing fundraising haul:
Obama, following the rules, has raised this huge amount of money partly through methods pioneered by McCain himself. Don't forget, McCain was the original Internet-fundraising candidate back in 2000. Amazingly, at a moment when the the US has racked up record debt, Obama declines to take $84 million dollars from the taxpayers, preferring to take money from individuals voluntarily giving it.
But, that very idea is anathema to McCain. He sees a problem in need of "fixing." Funny, the constraints his own law created caused him to start playing fast and loose the rules when he came perilously close to the pre-convention spending limits.
Consider the implications of McCain's statement. A record amount of Americans choosing to give a record amount of money to a candidate they support (much of it in small donations) is ipso facto evidence of a likely scandal. But, of course, at the heart of McCain-Feingold is a belief that money -- in the political process -- is an inherently bad thing.
Remember once again, McCain became such a crusader when he, personally, was corrupted by Charles Keating. Because McCain showed weakness in the face of temptation, everyone else -- including innocent Americans who happen only to be "guilty" of being inspired by a candidate -- must be considered "suspect" in a likely future "scandal," the only evidence of which is that Obama raised a heckuva lof of money. Yet, this is a "problem" that needs to be "fixed." So, for those watching, this again sends the message : Politicians screw up, the public pays the price.
UPDATE: Patrick Ruffini piles on -- he also predicts that Obama is on track for a $190 million-plus haul in October. On "This Week" yesterday, my old boss also Newt had fun at the irony of McCain being laid low by McCain-Feingold.
|
Senator Obama raised $150 million in — I understand, during the month of September, completely breaking whatever idea we had after Watergate to keep the costs and spending on campaigns under control — first time, first time since the Watergate scandal.And I can tell you this, that has unleashed now in presidential campaigns a new flood of spending that will then cause a scandal, and then we will fix it again.
So, the man who brought us McCain-Feingold is at it again!
Obama, following the rules, has raised this huge amount of money partly through methods pioneered by McCain himself. Don't forget, McCain was the original Internet-fundraising candidate back in 2000. Amazingly, at a moment when the the US has racked up record debt, Obama declines to take $84 million dollars from the taxpayers, preferring to take money from individuals voluntarily giving it.
But, that very idea is anathema to McCain. He sees a problem in need of "fixing." Funny, the constraints his own law created caused him to start playing fast and loose the rules when he came perilously close to the pre-convention spending limits.
Consider the implications of McCain's statement. A record amount of Americans choosing to give a record amount of money to a candidate they support (much of it in small donations) is ipso facto evidence of a likely scandal. But, of course, at the heart of McCain-Feingold is a belief that money -- in the political process -- is an inherently bad thing.
Remember once again, McCain became such a crusader when he, personally, was corrupted by Charles Keating. Because McCain showed weakness in the face of temptation, everyone else -- including innocent Americans who happen only to be "guilty" of being inspired by a candidate -- must be considered "suspect" in a likely future "scandal," the only evidence of which is that Obama raised a heckuva lof of money. Yet, this is a "problem" that needs to be "fixed." So, for those watching, this again sends the message : Politicians screw up, the public pays the price.
UPDATE: Patrick Ruffini piles on -- he also predicts that Obama is on track for a $190 million-plus haul in October. On "This Week" yesterday, my old boss also Newt had fun at the irony of McCain being laid low by McCain-Feingold.
Labels: fundraising, John McCain, McCain-Feingold
Sunday, October 19, 2008
$150 Million-Plus (KAPOW-ELL!)
Wow. Wow.
Well, this is undoubtedly helping Sen. Obama make his closing arguments in the presidential race.
UPDATE: A darn good day for the senator from Illinois. In addition to the big money announcement, he gets a "big-money" endorsement with Colin Powell coming on board. Beyond the foreign-policy heft and reassurance he brings to middle-of-the-road voters (despite the hit that his reputation took over the WMDs in Iraq), the timing of this declaration inevitably forces the McCain campaign to deal with this when he wants to focus more on the tax issue. Though many will draw the conclusion that Powell decided to cross parties just because of race. However, the former secretary of state gave broad, nuanced, reasons for his choice. As he pointed out, if it was just solely (soul-ly?) a "black thing," he could have done it weeks ago. Ironically, considering Powell's foreign policy portfolio, he sounded as if it was more the McCain campaign's herky-jerky response to the economic crisis that ended up being the deciding factor in his endorsement.
UPDATE II: For those who want the video without having to link through to the MSNBC page:
UPDATE III: Very smart measured response from McCain:
|
Well, this is undoubtedly helping Sen. Obama make his closing arguments in the presidential race.
UPDATE: A darn good day for the senator from Illinois. In addition to the big money announcement, he gets a "big-money" endorsement with Colin Powell coming on board. Beyond the foreign-policy heft and reassurance he brings to middle-of-the-road voters (despite the hit that his reputation took over the WMDs in Iraq), the timing of this declaration inevitably forces the McCain campaign to deal with this when he wants to focus more on the tax issue. Though many will draw the conclusion that Powell decided to cross parties just because of race. However, the former secretary of state gave broad, nuanced, reasons for his choice. As he pointed out, if it was just solely (soul-ly?) a "black thing," he could have done it weeks ago. Ironically, considering Powell's foreign policy portfolio, he sounded as if it was more the McCain campaign's herky-jerky response to the economic crisis that ended up being the deciding factor in his endorsement.
UPDATE II: For those who want the video without having to link through to the MSNBC page:
UPDATE III: Very smart measured response from McCain:
"Well, I've always admired and respected Gen. Powell. We're longtime friends," McCain stated. "This doesn't come as a surprise. But I'm also very pleased to have the endorsement of four former secretaries of state, Secretaries Kissinger, Baker, Eagleburger and Haig. And I'm proud to have the endorsement of well over 200 retired Army generals and admirals. But I respect and continue to respect and admire Secretary Powell."
Labels: Barack Obama, Colin Powell, fundraising
Thursday, April 03, 2008
No Bowling For Dollars...
...but the Obama money train rolls on:
Clearly, Obama's campaign is on the ropes. His fundraising dropped off by about 25 percent!
Of course, when your previous month was a record $55 million, you can afford a little "slowdown." Which, of course, this isn't. Another 218,000 first-time donors. HRC, meanwhile, is expected to raise about $20 million -- but owes nearly $9 mullion to vendors who are getting a bit antsy over late payments.
Wonder what they have to say about the new Clinton ad invoking an economic "crisis" and "home forclosures mounting" and "markets teetering"?
|
Clearly, Obama's campaign is on the ropes. His fundraising dropped off by about 25 percent!
Of course, when your previous month was a record $55 million, you can afford a little "slowdown." Which, of course, this isn't. Another 218,000 first-time donors. HRC, meanwhile, is expected to raise about $20 million -- but owes nearly $9 mullion to vendors who are getting a bit antsy over late payments.
Wonder what they have to say about the new Clinton ad invoking an economic "crisis" and "home forclosures mounting" and "markets teetering"?
Labels: Barack Obama, fundraising, Hillary Clinton
Friday, March 07, 2008
GOP Not Dead Yet?
The Democratic presidential candidates are raking in the money.
The Democratic National Committee? Hmmm...not so much. That could have interesting developments down the road in terms of limiting some of the damage in House and Senate races (the Democrats have an edge in fundraising in their respective congressional and senate campaign committees). Indeed, the NRCC is in the middle of major scandal out of its fundraising shop.
However, the RNC numbers are something of a bright light in an otherwise dismal political picture.
But, some people say, what about the fact that conservatives are demoralized and may not turn out?
Well, trust liberals to come through and fire up part of the social conservative base -- the homeschoolers, for example. (Thanks to ERA for the tip.)
|
The Democratic National Committee? Hmmm...not so much. That could have interesting developments down the road in terms of limiting some of the damage in House and Senate races (the Democrats have an edge in fundraising in their respective congressional and senate campaign committees). Indeed, the NRCC is in the middle of major scandal out of its fundraising shop.
However, the RNC numbers are something of a bright light in an otherwise dismal political picture.
But, some people say, what about the fact that conservatives are demoralized and may not turn out?
Well, trust liberals to come through and fire up part of the social conservative base -- the homeschoolers, for example. (Thanks to ERA for the tip.)
Labels: fundraising, Republicans
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
GOP Cash Overview
Rudy by a nose over Romney -- though they weren't that far in front of McCain's truly disastrous showing (McCain was worse off because of his awful first quarter and his cash-on-hand situation).
As Jonathan Martin points out, Hillary and Barack raised $12 million more in primary money than McCain, Giuliani and Romney did combined.
Ouch.
It's hard out here being in the "party of the rich."
The upside? A lot of people are holding their fire (and their wallets) for Fred Thompson's official jump into the race. That should help the overall picture for the GOP.
How much?
We'll see.
|
As Jonathan Martin points out, Hillary and Barack raised $12 million more in primary money than McCain, Giuliani and Romney did combined.
Ouch.
It's hard out here being in the "party of the rich."
The upside? A lot of people are holding their fire (and their wallets) for Fred Thompson's official jump into the race. That should help the overall picture for the GOP.
How much?
We'll see.
Labels: fundraising, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Senator John McCain
Straight Talk Express Crash
With barely restrained glee, my pal Ryan Sager analyzes the presidential campaign equivalent of this year's Yankees -- John McCain.
Ryan has long disliked McCain -- primarily because of campaign finance reform (I tended to like McCain, despite CFR).
Still, despite McCain's occasionally acerbic personality and his feuds with social conservatives, this total collapse is still something of a shock (though we did predict here that the immigration bill would likely be the final straw, and that seems to be the case).
|
Ryan has long disliked McCain -- primarily because of campaign finance reform (I tended to like McCain, despite CFR).
Still, despite McCain's occasionally acerbic personality and his feuds with social conservatives, this total collapse is still something of a shock (though we did predict here that the immigration bill would likely be the final straw, and that seems to be the case).
Labels: fundraising, GOP 2008 President, immigration, Senator John McCain
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Obama's $tory
The full breadth of Barack Obama's first-quarter fundraising triumph is just now being realized. Dick Morris and his wife Eileen McGann list a few of the particulars:
There are the young guns:
And there are the blatantly disenchanted Clintonites, including one with feeling similar to those expressed earlier this year by Hollywood mogul David Geffen:
|
* Hillary raised extensive contributions, certainly more than $1 million, from special-interest political-action committees (PACs) and lobbyists. Obama refused to tap this source of funding and even returned $50,000 he'd received from lobbyists.New York magazine goes behind the scenes to track down some of the Big Apple money people making up Obama's fundraising team. Especially juicy are the insights of those making conscious decisions to go with Barack over Hillary.
* An estimated three-quarters of Clinton's donors have maxed out, (that is, given the legal maximum of $2,300 a person for during the primary), vs. with fewer than half of Obama's contributors, according to news reports. Most of his donors can keep giving; most of hers can't.
* Obama out-raised Clinton on the Web by 3:2. Internet money is especially valuable because it can be tapped repeatedly and quickly, as Howard Dean showed in '04.
* Hillary didn't list any expenditures for candidate travel, charter flights, makeup or hair. She may have rolled over this spending so as not to have to deplete her cash-on-hand showing.
There are the young guns:
But the most striking element of its composition wasn’t racial but generational: Unlike the Clinton side, which was dominated by folks in their fifties, the Obamans were mostly in their forties. “One thing we recognized early on,” says David Axelrod, the campaign’s chief strategist, “was that there is a substrata of people who in past campaigns weren’t allowed to sit at the adult table but who all of a sudden were quite formidable.”How it must gall the Clintons to realize that they are no longer the new energetic kids on the block as they were back in 1992!
Many of Obama’s baby bundlers cut their teeth in Bill Clinton’s administration. Mathis and Froman both worked in the Treasury Department, while Rubin, son of Bob, had been a staffer at the Federal Communications Commission. There was also Josh Steiner, another Treasury hand and now a partner of Steve Rattner’s at the Quadrangle Group. And others had no Clintonian association, but were emerging fund-raising powerhouses, such as former Goldman Sachs golden boy Eric Mindich.
At the heart of the next-gen cadre were Froman and Mathis, both law-school classmates of Obama’s. Together, they recognized that, whereas the Clinton fund-raising corps represented the financial elite tossed up by the LBO and M&A booms of the eighties, they were in a position to mine the vein of freshly minted money spawned by the hedge-fund and private- equity eruptions of the new millennium. The players behind those booms had no loyalties, and owed no debts, to the Clinton dynasty. They were looking for a candidate to call their own.
“In Barack’s speech in Selma [earlier this year],” a baby bundler says, “he talked about the Moses generation and the Joshua generation in the civil-rights movement. It’s sorta the same story here.” He continues, “If we all lined up for Hillary, we wouldn’t have even gotten into the anteroom, let alone had seats at the table—there’s no more room. It would’ve been, ‘You have an idea? Send us an e-mail and we’ll have someone get back to you. Oh, and don’t forget to send those checks.’ But that’s not how it is with Barack. We’re already at the table.”
And there are the blatantly disenchanted Clintonites, including one with feeling similar to those expressed earlier this year by Hollywood mogul David Geffen:
“The first part of the calculus was about the civic good,” one former administration official tells me. “Who would be a better president? It’s a toss-up—maybe Hillary on the margin. But the likelihood is that whoever you support is going to lose, that’s just the odds, so it should matter who’d be the better candidate—I mean, better for the country. And I thought Obama, simply by being a candidate and by virtue of the policies and values he’d espouse as a candidate, had a chance to change the country. The second part is the personal: The Clintons are basically disloyal people. They have a huge track record of jettisoning people far closer to them than I am on the slightest political pretext. Loyalty has to be a two-way street. I don’t think they’ve earned the right to play the loyalty card.”Meanwhile, The Washington Post zooms in on the fundraising veterans from Clinton and Bush past campaigns and finds many of the Bushies staying on the sidelines, not overwhelmingly taken in by any of the current GOP field.
Labels: Barack Obama, Democratic 2008 Presidential, fundraising, Hillary Clinton
