Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CQ Politics)   As usual, the media is creaming its jeans over the Democrats' ability to raise money. Also as usual, the GOP is quietly raising far more money than the Democrats anyway   (cqpolitics.com) divider line
57
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

435 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Feb 2007 at 1:16 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



57 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
SmoothTex
2007-02-22 11:16:16 AM  
This will end well...

//grabs popcorn, humps donkey.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 11:31:47 AM  
Also as usual, the GOP is quietly raising far more money than the Democrats anyway...

...in sub-$200 increments from individuals, mostly.

How about a breakdown of total cash donated to each side including candidates and owned and operated PACs, not just the national committees? And what's Kerry doing with that bundle he didn't feel like spending in 2004? And is there some reset button we could push to flush the current batch of candidates and bring in new ones?
 
MrWhipee
2007-02-22 11:36:46 AM  
Hurray! I'm for the other team!

/shake those pompoms
 
Code_Archeologist
2007-02-22 12:18:17 PM  
Well... when you are the party that puts money into the pockets of the rich, you tend to have wealthier donors.

But as 2006 showed, the one with the greatest campaign funding doesn't always win the race.
 
Skleenar
2007-02-22 12:20:11 PM  
Apparently, having lots of people give you money does not equate to having more people vote for you.
 
Will N. Dowd
2007-02-22 12:35:55 PM  
How about instead of raising money, we just fix the voting system instead.
 
albo
2007-02-22 1:16:51 PM  
does this include the massive in-kind contributions the Demcorats get from unions, especially the teachers and public employee unions, who call people, register them, and GOTV? that's worth gold, and the GOP doesn't have a comparable constituency of free workers
 
Rovian
2007-02-22 1:17:11 PM  
Call your congress people and tell them you support reinstatement of the fairness doctrine.
 
rppp01a
2007-02-22 1:18:55 PM  
Can we *please* stop hearing about an election that is 18+ months off? Can these candidates please go back and do the job they were elected to do?

/disgusted voter/
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 1:21:52 PM  
albo: the GOP doesn't have a comparable constituency of free workers


This is incorrect. They have a significant grassroots orgnaization centered mostly around conservative church networks.
 
Code_Archeologist
2007-02-22 1:23:28 PM  
albo
does this include the massive in-kind contributions the Demcorats get from unions, especially the teachers and public employee unions, who call people, register them, and GOTV? that's worth gold, and the GOP doesn't have a comparable constituency of free workers

The Republicans have an equally large in-kind contribution pool from in the form of conservative mega-church and other religiously based grassroots organizations.
 
cltbuilder
2007-02-22 1:24:00 PM  
rppp01a Can we *please* stop hearing about an election that is 18+ months off? Can these candidates please go back and do the job they were elected to do?

Agreed. I refuse to vote for any candidate who is not doing the job they were elected to do so that they can campaign for a primary still a year away.

I guess I will have to vote for Rudy.
 
Gosling
2007-02-22 1:35:40 PM  
And this would be very useful information if money was a block of registered voters.
 
maxheck
2007-02-22 1:38:13 PM  
This thread needs more pics of enthusiastic cheerleaders.
 
HotWingConspiracy
2007-02-22 1:42:17 PM  
Most people don't brag about being money grubbers.
 
Rovian
2007-02-22 1:46:38 PM  
Step 1
http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/14617/1/Oprah-Winfrey-BillO.wmv

Step 2
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountr y=en_US&PageId=3059

Step 3
http://www2.oprah.com/email/tows/email_tows_main.jhtml
 
bmasso
2007-02-22 1:50:51 PM  
Code_Archeologist : Well... when you are the party that puts money into the pockets of the rich, you tend to have wealthier donors.

FTA : Of the $10.4 million the RNC raised last month from individuals, $2.6 million was itemized and $7.8 million was unitemized. Of the $5.2 million the DNC raised last month from individuals, $1.5 million was itemized and $3.7 million was unitemized.

Let's look at those numbers....
(R) 2.6/10.4 = 25.0% from over $200
(D) 1.5/5.2 = 28.8% from over $200

So you're saying that the Dems are the "party that puts money into the pockets of the rich"? Who knew?

Seriously, this was analyzed to death in the LAST election cycle.
The average (D) contribution is bigger than for the (R)s.
Has been for the last few election cycles at least.
The total #of contributions is higher for the (R)s,
enough so to more than offset the (D)'s advantage in avg. dollar amounts.

So the (D)s get bigger contributions, the (R)s get more of them.
Quite the obverse of what a KOSsack might unthinkingly believe.
 
twilson2
2007-02-22 1:53:15 PM  
>> Also as usual, the GOP is quietly raising far more money than the Democrats anyway

And that speaks volumes about what LOSERS the cons are.

They have a big advantage and end up losing anyway.
 
FlashLV
2007-02-22 1:56:59 PM  
It's all a waste of money. They should stop federal matching of money since they really don't need it.
 
dr_michael_hfuhruhurr
2007-02-22 1:59:27 PM  
Will N. Dowd: How about instead of raising money, we just fix the voting system instead.

Please, PLEASE! Now you're just being kooky and trying to solve the problem.
 
FlashLV
2007-02-22 2:00:42 PM  
twilson2

And that speaks volumes about what LOSERS the cons are.

They have a big advantage and end up losing anyway.

What??

'00 and '04 ring a bell?
 
Sloth_DC
2007-02-22 2:02:26 PM  
Rovian: Call your congress people and tell them you support reinstatement of the fairness doctrine.

Why?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 2:04:53 PM  
Skleenar: Apparently, having lots of people give you money does not equate to having more people vote for you.

Exactly. Which is why I marvel at the media's inability to grasp this fact. They went so gaga over Howard Dean's ability to raise money online that they barely noticed he went down in flames with the very first primary.

Every time a Democratic candidate starts scraping up some bread, the media spooges its shorts without paying any attention to the viability of the candidate. Never quite understood that.
 
bmasso
2007-02-22 2:05:51 PM  
Rovian : Call your congress people and tell them you support reinstatement of the fairness doctrine.

Sloth_DC : Why?

Because that's the only way to guarantee full employment for Air America workers.
Make you have to listen to them BY LAW.
It's not like George Soros won't eventually run out of money......
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 2:15:16 PM  
bmasso: Let's look at those numbers....
(R) 2.6/10.4 = 25.0% from over $200
(D) 1.5/5.2 = 28.8% from over $200

So you're saying that the Dems are the "party that puts money into the pockets of the rich"? Who knew?

Seriously, this was analyzed to death in the LAST election cycle.
The average (D) contribution is bigger than for the (R)s.
Has been for the last few election cycles at least.
The total #of contributions is higher for the (R)s,
enough so to more than offset the (D)'s advantage in avg. dollar amounts.


Your conclusion does not follow from that math as it just shows above and below a cut-off, not any sort of average.
 
swankywanky
2007-02-22 2:15:35 PM  
this headline brought to you by Samuel L. Bronkowitz Productions
 
TofuTheAlmighty [BareFark]
2007-02-22 2:22:33 PM  
Submitter needs to learn that the DNC and RNC are party committees, not candidate committees. Dem candidates are raking in the cash because the 2008 Dem presidential bench is loaded while the GOP counterpart is simply atrocious. The RNC almost always outraises the DNC simply because increasing personal wealth correlates with increasing support of the GOP i.e. GOP voters tend to have more disposable income to donate.
 
PeopleFirst
2007-02-22 2:24:46 PM  
ZAZ: And is there some reset button we could push to flush the current batch of candidates and bring in new ones?

Right next to the "produce new supermodel for me" button.
 
TheNewJesus
2007-02-22 2:28:08 PM  
"Welcome to the United Bag of Assholes!"
 
PeopleFirst
2007-02-22 2:31:19 PM  
Rovian

I saw the video and went to the links. I don't get it.
 
Code_Archeologist
2007-02-22 2:32:14 PM  
Sloth_DC
Rovian: Call your congress people and tell them you support reinstatement of the fairness doctrine.

Why?

Because it is in the public interest for all sides of any issue be presented to facilitate an informed electorate. Further radio and TV stations do not own the broadcast frequencies that they use to broadcast over, they only borrow them from the people.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 2:32:40 PM  
TofuTheAlmighty: The RNC almost always outraises the DNC simply because increasing personal wealth correlates with increasing support of the GOP i.e. GOP voters tend to have more disposable income to donate.

What about the just-cited report showing the RNC has fewer donors who tend to make very large donations, while the GOP has far more donors who tend to make smaller donations?

Oh, right--that would be because the GOP appeals to the mouth-breathing NASCAR dad/soccer mom morons, not the sophisticated urbanite.
 
PeopleFirst
2007-02-22 2:33:51 PM  
Code_Archeologist: Because it is in the public interest for all sides of any issue be presented to facilitate an informed electorate. Further radio and TV stations do not own the broadcast frequencies that they use to broadcast over, they only borrow them from the people.

Nice idea, but the Fairness doctrine only applies to the radio and not TV. If it did apply to the TV the Westboro Church could demand equal time on Will and Grace.
 
Sloth_DC
2007-02-22 2:35:11 PM  
Code_Archeologist: Because it is in the public interest for all sides of any issue be presented to facilitate an informed electorate.

All sides as defined by whom? Equal time for the libertarian and green views, or just the two Statist/Corporatist parties? Are we going to mandate equal time between evolutionists and creationists? Who decides what constitutes "all sides of any issue" which need to be presented?

Further radio and TV stations do not own the broadcast frequencies that they use to broadcast over, they only borrow them from the people.

Technically, they lease them, but whatever. You can't own the beach, man.
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 2:37:52 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: What about the just-cited report showing the RNC has fewer donors who tend to make very large donations,


What report is that? If you could link it I'd like to see it.

The numbers from this particular article don't bear that out. The RNC may have slightly less large donors as a percentage of their overall donor base but clearly have more large donors (as opposed to "fewer") based on the fact that it raised almost twice as much from them.

The "itemization" thing is a bit of a red-herring anyways as it ignores bundling and funneling funds through your kids.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 2:39:04 PM  
PeopleFirst: Nice idea, but the Fairness doctrine only applies to the radio and not TV.

It used to apply to all media.

In 1984 (IIRC), Walter Mondale's campaign got to sniveling because some stations were running old Reagan movies; Mondale wanted equal time under the Fairness doctrine.
 
Rovian
2007-02-22 2:40:39 PM  
http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/13684/1/Countdown-Hornbeck-OReill y.wmv
Here is Oreilly before his bloviating comments on Oprah designed to give him an opportunity to talk tough about a very serious issue, and garner support for his slanted commentary on his own show.

Notice the Center for missing and exploited children disinvited Oreilly after hearing his initial comments about Sean Hornbeck.

Oprah is another mouthpiece for the smear machine.
 
LincolnLogolas
2007-02-22 2:41:45 PM  
Did someone say cheerleaders?
[image from moport.org too old to be available]
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 2:42:46 PM  
Abagadro: The "itemization" thing is a bit of a red-herring anyways as it ignores bundling and funneling funds through your kids.

So if I have this straight:

1. If the GOP raises LESS money overall, it's because they have lousy candidates.

2. If they raise MORE money overall it's because they're the party of the rich.

3. If they have fewer, but larger, donors, it's because they're good at putting money in big business' pockets and/or hiding it behind bundles.

4. If they more more, but smaller, donors, it's because they're good at fooling the electorate with scaremongering and swiftboating.

5. Under no circumstances does anyone donate to the GOP because they actually approve of GOP policy.

That about right?
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 2:46:11 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: That about right?

Calm down Beavis. I don't even know what the hell you are talking about. If you want to make stuff up and create strange strawmen, feel free. I was just asking you a question about an assertion you made of a report (as I would like to see it) and pointing out that the itemization threshold is generally seen as a pointless indicator of pretty much anything. If you could point out anywhere where I have said any of the things you itemized, I'd address them.

Under no circumstances does anyone donate to the GOP because they actually approve of GOP policy.

I'd say that is why anyone donates to a party. Who said any different?
 
Korovyov
2007-02-22 2:50:41 PM  
Abagrado --
Some cynics might assume that political contributions do not mean approval of existing policy, so much as purchasing new ones. That's not a position I agree with, but I would argue that a political contribution does not necessarily mean that the donor agrees with the recipient on anything at all; the donor might instead be seeing other advantages. For instance, backing third parties or specific candidates who are likely to disproportionately siphon voters from more dangerous opposition, or to back a third party merely on principle that a government should not be a duopoly, or to back somebody because he detests the opposition more.
 
Code_Archeologist
2007-02-22 2:54:47 PM  
Sloth_DC Who decides what constitutes "all sides of any issue" which need to be presented?

"all sides of any issue" should be modified to honest and balanced presentation of controversial issues of public importance. Otherwise you would have putzes wanting to argue about every single science show on TV. And it was always meant as a guideline for radio and TV when reporting news worthy items... and there would not be fines or othersuch stupid shiat, but a broadcaster could be refused renewal of its broadcasting liscence if the listening public petitioned the FCC with proof of the broadcaster failing to be honest and balanced.

I don't think that this is nearly as complex as people are making it out to be.
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 2:56:16 PM  
Korovyov

Of course donations are often used to influence policy (or more accurately usually to just gain access) but there is usually at least an affinity for the party and its existing positions to begin with as otherwise you would mostly be going on a flier. I still have no idea what Merv was blathering on about.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 3:07:23 PM  
Abagadro: I still have no idea what Merv was blathering on about.

Simple: Every election cycle the media gets in a tizzy about the Dems raising more money than God until someone points out that the GOP is raising even more, at which point everyone hastens to explain that money =/= votes and besides, every indicator used to measure donations is meaningless, which raises the question of why the media brought up the issue in the first place.
 
Saiga410
2007-02-22 3:15:03 PM  
Korovyov For instance, backing third parties or specific candidates who are likely to disproportionately siphon voters from more dangerous opposition

Thanks for reminding me, I need to write out my check to the Green Party.

Go, errr, Nader. (God I feel dirty)
 
Abagadro
2007-02-22 3:23:32 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: Simple: Every election cycle the media gets in a tizzy about the Dems raising more money than God until someone points out that the GOP is raising even more, at which point everyone hastens to explain that money =/= votes and besides, every indicator used to measure donations is meaningless, which raises the question of why the media brought up the issue in the first place.


Then why not just say that instead of all that other nonsense.
 
Rovian
2007-02-22 3:29:55 PM  
Fixed it, thanks everyone.


Step 1- Listen to Bill O'Reallys comments about Sean Hornbeck.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/13684/1/Countdown-Hornbeck-OReill y.wmv

Step 2 - Check the Center for Missing and exploited children for their reaction.
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountr y=en_US&PageId=3059

Step 3 - Watch Oprah listen in doe-eyed approval to the television tough guy bloviate about a very serious issue to garner support for the slanted commentary on his own show.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/14617/1/Oprah-Winfrey-BillO.wmv

Step4- Express your disapproval.
http://www2.oprah.com/email/tows/email_tows_main.jhtml

Step5 Wash, rinse, repeat.
 
bin_smokin
2007-02-22 3:30:09 PM  
2 words: Special Intrests
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-02-22 3:34:24 PM  
Abagadro: Then why not just say that instead of all that other nonsense.

Pick one:

1. Just to bother you.

2. Nonsense is more fun.
 
mild7
2007-02-22 4:26:24 PM  
My continuing support donation to the Grand Old Party went out yesterday.

Will send Newt a big fat check when he announces.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

Want more stories with less ads? Try

TotalFark

It's what the cool kids are doing.
It also helps us pay the bills.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.