View Full Version : Obama: Needs to beg harder.

07-10-2012, 05:49 AM
Nobody is bragging about that 1 billion dollar fund raising campaign now. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif
Romney may even out raise him. Epic fail.

<span style="color: #000000"><span style='font-size: 23pt'>Obama Trails Romney Again in Battle for Campaign Cash</span>

In the battle for political cash, President Obama is finding himself in an unaccustomed place during the final months of the 2012 campaign: he is losing.

Obama’s Camp Makes Aggressive Push for Romney to Disclose Offshore Finances (July 10, 2012)

National Twitter Logo.
Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @NYTNational for breaking news and headlines.

Twitter List: Reporters and Editors

Mitt Romney and the Republican National Committee easily outraised the formidable Obama money machine for the second month in a row. A nonstop schedule of high-dollar events around the country brought in $106 million during June to Mr. Obama’s $71 million, giving him and his party four times the cash on hand that it had just three months ago.

Mr. Obama’s fund-raising deficit in part reflects how steeply the terrain has shifted since 2008, when many Republican donors embraced the candidate and his campaign raised millions of dollars from Wall Street and other traditionally right-leaning industries. Now those donors are swinging hard back to the Republican Party — and to Mr. Romney, whose promise to curtail regulation and cut taxes has helped draw a torrent of five-figure checks.

In a worrisome development for the Obama campaign, Mr. Romney, who until now has been heavily dependent on donors giving the maximum federal contribution, also showed success in June drawing small donors, a traditional strength of the Obama campaign. Reflecting the intensifying general election matchup with Mr. Obama and conservative anger over the recent Supreme Court decision upholding the president’s signature health care law, Mr. Romney raised about a third of his total in checks of under $250, officials said on Monday. Mr. Romney and the R.N.C. now have about $160 million in cash.

“This month’s fund-raising is a statement from voters that they want a change of direction in Washington,” Spencer Zwick, Mr. Romney’s finance chief, said in a statement.

Mr. Romney’s surge puts him on track to raise the $800 million his campaign and the Republican National Committee hope to bring in by Election Day, leaving the real possibility that Mr. Obama could be outspent despite the advantages of incumbency. And with political reality reasserting itself on Mr. Obama, he is being forced to rely more heavily on traditional Democratic constituencies, like Hollywood, labor unions and gay donors, as well as his own millions of small donors.

“It’s the perfect storm for Republicans,” said R. Donahue Peebles, a New York businessman who has raised more than $100,000 for Mr. Obama. “Republicans and independents who supported the president financially thought they would see a change in how Washington worked. What they see now, and it’s not necessarily the president’s fault, is a lot of partisanship in Washington and a struggling economy.”

Mr. Obama, who reported about $109 million in cash in the bank at the end of May, has been significantly outspending Mr. Romney on advertising in swing states. But Mr. Romney’s fund-raising successes are being matched by Republican-leaning outside groups, who are barraging the airwaves with anti-Obama advertisements that the president’s campaign has been forced to spend its own money to match. On Monday, the biggest of the “super PACs,” American Crossroads, announced a $40 million, nine-state fall ad campaign against Mr. Obama, coming on top of a $25 million spree by an affiliate that will run through Labor Day.

Mr. Obama easily outraised Mr. Romney through much of the last year, as Mr. Romney fought for the Republican nomination and Mr. Obama exploited his incumbency to raise large checks in conjunction with the Democratic National Committee. And newly minted nominees typically take in huge influxes of cash as major donors come off the sidelines at the end of a nominating fight, as John Kerry did during the early months of the 2004 general election campaign against George W. Bush. Come November, the final tally between the two candidates could be close to a draw.

Yet money flooding into Mr. Romney’s campaign suggests that even Mr. Obama — the most prodigious fund-raiser to date in political history — can be beaten. And Democratic-aligned outside groups, including those investing heavily in races for the House and the Senate, are far behind their Republican counterparts in raising and spending money.

All told, Republican candidates, party committees and outside groups have spent $269 million on broadcast advertising, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, compared with $133 million for the Democratic side. Those totals do not included tens of millions of dollars that Mr. Obama invested early in the cycle on data mining, technology and campaign infrastructure, efforts Mr. Romney is now seeking to match on the fly.

Mr. Obama is being outraised despite a more intense fund-raising schedule than any of his predecessors: He was scheduled to hold two events on Monday in Washington, bringing the total to 174 fund-raisers since formally beginning his re-election campaign last year, according to CBS News.
<span style="color: #CC0000"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>
Mr. Obama sought to rally supporters on Monday with a blunt e-mail from Ann Marie Habershaw, the campaign’s chief operating officer.

“We could lose if this continues,” Ms. Habershaw warned.

Several top Obama donors said privately that Mr. Obama’s attacks on Mr. Romney’s private equity career, the president’s handling of White House relations with business leaders and his criticisms of tax rates for the wealthy had made it harder for some of his allies to raise money on Mr. Obama’s behalf from the financial sector and other industries.

“He will not have the same level of support from the business community as last time — either in endorsements, money or support,” said one Obama backer who declined to be identified because of his relationship with the campaign. “That’s clear.”</span>
Mr. Peebles, the Obama fund-raiser, echoed objections among some other Democrats, many with ties to the financial industry, over what he said were unreasonable attacks on the wealthy by the Obama campaign.

“I just got back from Rhode Island on my boat,” Mr. Peebles said, referring to criticism of Mr. Romney’s much-photographed vacation boating last week on New Hampshire’s Lake Winnipesaukee. “I can hold 12 people on my boat. I don’t feel that I’m out of touch with Americans or that I am a bad person. I find it offensive, and I’m a supporter.” </span>

07-10-2012, 11:11 AM
Quite a gift to the Obama campaign, actually, when you think about it.

Takes the spotlight OFF Obama's prior position as the Wall Street favorite, and large beneficiary of their largesse, while handing him that club to hit Romney over the head.

Also makes it hard for Romney to control his messaging, because of now, he's been way outspent in the swing states by the SuperPAC guys (admittedly on his team, but pushing memes different from the campaign's).

Unless there is a way to unring a bell, Obama's been defining Romney in a way that will be very hard to change: correctly, as an uber-1%r, in a time when the economic hardship breeds still more resentment and class envy than always lurks just below the surface in our polity.

As Fox and Friends' Kilmeade said about yesterday, unfortunately (for this issue), 60% of Americans think the rich pay too little in taxes, and of course, Romney's key economic policy is to have them pay less-- much less-- than even the W tax rate cuts levels.

07-10-2012, 12:35 PM
Romney is not uber rich. He is not a billionaire.

I am sure Obama will try to spin it to his advantage.
However the fact that his donations have dropped so sharply from the previous election has them worried.

Apparently the last 3 of Romneys fund raisers were filled with very wealth individuals that contributed to Obama the last time around.

07-10-2012, 01:31 PM
Close enough. Guy has so much money he has no idea where all of it is, he claims. Could be that the new requirements for filings on foreign accounts, newly requiring principle amounts and not just income as of the 2011 tax season, will show the estimated $250 million net worth is far higher.

By far the richest candidate ever for a major party (excluding Steve (Malcolm) Forbes, Jr., who tried but didn't get the nomination, and H. Ross Perot, not a major party's candidate), although both McCain and Kerry married into comparable or larger fortunes not of their making or under their control.

I'm not sure O's donations have dropped at all for the general election (he had no primaries to raise money for, and that shouldn't be counted against his general election totals), more that his plan to EXCEED that cash haul by $400 million to reach $1 billion will not occur.

Do you think he will be shy of the $600 million total from last time? I haven't heard that myself.

07-10-2012, 01:35 PM
Romney is now projected to raise 800,000,000.
Obama is expected to raise substantially less than that at the moment.

However nothing is set in stone.

07-10-2012, 01:48 PM
Thinking back to the last Democratic Party president, in '96, Clinton raised $333 million, and Dole, $555 million.

Forgetting now, who won that one again?

07-10-2012, 01:59 PM
Barry aint no Clinton.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/demo...ase_648372.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/democrats-white-house-and-senate-out-reach-if-fundraising-doesnt-increase_648372.html)

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>Democrats: White House and Senate 'Out of Reach' If Fundraising Doesn't Increase</span>

07-10-2012, 02:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thinking back to the last Democratic Party president, in '96, Clinton raised $333 million, and Dole, $555 million.

Forgetting now, who won that one again? </div></div>Neither of those numbers is even close to accurate ... but nothing has ever lowed you from making up numbers

07-10-2012, 03:11 PM
Perhaps I misremember, but those are the numbers I recall. Meaning the candidates' take, plus the national committees (DNC, RNC)

What were they, if you know better?

Ok, looking a bit, here are some numbers for the 1996 campaign.

Dole and Clinton's personal campaigns spent $232 million.

The RNC and DNC raised $262 million in soft monies alone.

PACs raised $218 million

Unions and other special interests raised $70 million.

This totals $782 million spent on the '96 presidential race (out of over $2 billion in total spent on all the races that year).

This is close to the total I suggested at $888 million, and I don't have a number for the RNC/DNC HARD money funds raised, which could very well make up that difference.

It seems in the ballpark I suggested, with the proviso that it should have said what Dole and Clinton raised on their own AND HAD SPENT ON THEIR BEHALF (by others).

From a WaPost campaign finance piece. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/intro4.htm)

This may still be somewhat incorrect, and I welcome any corrections from cited sources.

Gayle in MD
07-10-2012, 03:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Romney is not uber rich. He is not a billionaire.

<span style="color: #990000"> How do you know that? Seems to me no one knows how much money Romney is worth. Why do you think that he's got is money hidden all over the world. So we can all keep track of how much he has? LMAO!

I can assure you, even the IRS, would have to hire extras to take on the task of figuring out much money Romney has stashed away. </span>

I am sure Obama will try to spin it to his advantage.
However the fact that his donations have dropped so sharply from the previous election has them worried.

<span style="color: #990000">LOL, it's a tactical campaign strategy. The big bucks are coming a bit later, just as a famous hollywood icon stated last week on Piers Morgan's program. </span>

Apparently the last 3 of Romneys fund raisers were filled with very wealth individuals that contributed to Obama the last time around. </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000">Yep, all of them crooks, who figured out and learned from expierience that this president is legit, so now, we can see where they're putting their dirty money, and why, quite easily. Crooks support other crooks.

So why... since you think Mittens has it all in the bag, is Mittens disenfranchisng voters all over the country to throw the election????

I'd say if they're so sure of themselves, they wouldn't be practically crying Katey Bar The Door, on constitutional voter's rights!

You heard what his Pennsylvania operative said, they figure the only way this crook is getting into the White HOuse, is by throwing elections, using the same corrupt methods he used to get richer than he was when he was born, already rich.



07-10-2012, 04:51 PM
You sound a nervous Gayle.

As I have said before. I am not a Romney supporter.

I'm going to sit back and watch Obama's economy do all the work for Romney.

Gayle in MD
07-10-2012, 05:09 PM
Not really. I wasn't even talking!


07-10-2012, 05:22 PM
Sure you were.
Talk as you type. Everybody does it. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

07-11-2012, 05:07 AM
I love the smell of leftist fear.

Gayle in MD
07-11-2012, 05:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure you were.
Talk as you type. Everybody does it. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>

I'm not everybody.

Additionally, I'm not so desperate over the likely results of the coming elections that I have to spend every single day inflating and convoluting political non stories, into histrionic crying jags, LOL. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Nor do I have to pot shot with the same old escapist avoidence tactics of sniper styled, condescending, irrational personal attacks, by using the same two personally offensive attack sentences, over and over and over again.

But then I'm not really trying to convolute or embroider the reality, I'm against Repiglican Policies, hence the true reality is outrageous enough.

07-11-2012, 06:50 AM
Yes you do.

Gayle in MD
07-11-2012, 07:17 AM
HA HA HA HA. No, I don't. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

07-11-2012, 09:10 AM
Ok, it all comes rushing back...

The totals I gave were the totals of all of the formal committee expenditures for the two parties, plus their presidential campaign fundraising efforts.

So, not just the candidates' campaigns and the DNC and RNC in that mix, but also, the DSCC and DCCC and the GOP counterparts (their fundraising arms for the Senate and House, respectively).

Overall, at the official fundraising level, it was $555 GOP, $333 Democrat, figures in millions.

The results were mixed. Clinton was re-elected, and the Dems won 8 seats back in the House (but were still in the minority there). The GOP won a net of 2 Senate seats.