It gets even better.
Reports I’m seeing (And I’ve blogged) suggest that the RNC has raised on the order of five times what the DNC has raised. The LA Times Blog, this morning:
Led by chairman Mike Duncan, the Republican National Committee ended May with 13 times more money in the bank than its Democratic counterpart, and raised five times as much money in the same time frame.
…
Based on the numbers so far, the Republican Party appears poised to act as the financial equalizer in the fall campaign. The RNC disclosed that it ended May with $53.5 million in the bank, compared to $3.9 million for the Democratic National Committee, which is headed by Howard Dean.
Thanks to the continuing popularity and fundraising attraction of President Bush, the RNC continued to vastly out-raise the Democratic party, amassing $24.4 million just in May. Just so we’re clear, here, the RNC’s small donor donantions came up to a larger figure than EVERYTHING that the DNC raised.
Now of course the complaint will be that this is all big business, and large donations. But it’s not true. The article goes on to suggest that last month...The RNC raised more in small increments than the DNC’s total take in May of $4.8 million. Heh.
Draw your own conclusions, but it seems clear to me that the constant praise of the Obama money machine by the press, and their conclusions as regards Obama’s popularity based on this, are whistling in the dark. |
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
This is going to be PRICELESS...
Twenty buck that by the end of July, Obama will be making noise about how public-funding is an unfair advantage... :) |
| |
Written By:
Scott Jacobs
URL:
http://
|
You missed the problem for Obama, and it is two fold:
One, he needs those Hillary Clinton donors, and from what I am hearing they either maxed out at $2,300 or they just don’t want to pony up to Mr. Snake Oil Salesman.
Second, he is claiming that a large proportion of his donor base is from people giving less than $100 - in short, middle class and poor people. Well, in an ironic twist, the lousy economy is hurting those people, and they can barely afford rocketing fuel and food prices. Send $50 to Obama, and your family will starve this month. What choice to make? "Hope and Change," or the specter of Bobby Sands in your home?
Wouldn’t it be a huge laugh if Obama’s "opting out" of the public financing of elections system came back to bite him in the rearend somehow? |
| |
Written By:
James Marsden
URL:
http://
|
Second, he is claiming that a large proportion of his donor base is from people giving less than $100 - in short, middle class and poor people. Well, in an ironic twist, the lousy economy is hurting those people, and they can barely afford rocketing fuel and food prices. Send $50 to Obama, and your family will starve this month. What choice to make? "Hope and Change," or the specter of Bobby Sands in your home? So how to explain, then that the Republicans are getting such an amount of money from similarly small donations?
|
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
|
More people giving small amounts to the party’s coffers, few giving to McCain’s campaign fund... |
| |
Written By:
Scott Jacobs
URL:
http://
|
|
A few more displays of rank arrogance won’t help Obama much, either, is my guess. I’m also guessing that once he’s not got Hillary Clinton to distract people from his deficiencies the mood may shift. |
| |
Written By:
JorgXMcKie
URL:
http://
|
"the RNC’s small donor donantions"
Please, do you think we are stupid? There is no such thing as a ’small’ Republican donor. They are all greedy, exploiting plutocrats stealing from widows and orphans. If there are any ’small’ donations, it is because they are using false donors to conceal the massive amounts the few filthy rich donors are giving. Everbody knows the Republicans are the party of the rich. Sheesh. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
LOL....
I keep forgettin’...
|
| |
Written By:
Bithead
URL:
http://bitsblog.florack.us
|
