Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Frown face close-up on Monday.
Mitt Romney out-raised President Obama by more than $35 million, according to newly released fundraising numbers for June. Romney’s campaign and the RNC raked in $106 million — the best monthly haul yet in the 2012 campaign — compared to the $71 million brought in by Obama and the DNC.
June's health care ruling might have contributed to the dramatic uptick in donations. The Romney campaign reported raising $4.6 million via 47,000 online donations within the 24 hours after the ruling.
"This month's fundraising is a statement from voters that they want a change of direction in Washington,'' Spencer Zwick, Romney's finance chief said in a statement. This marks the second month in a row Romney has beat Obama in fundraising.
In the subject line of the email to supporters on Monday, Team Obama warned, "We could lose if this continues." The newsletter broke it down as "good news" (June was best fundraising month yet) and "some bad news" (they "still got beat"). The note from Ann Marie Habershaw, Chief Operating Officer of Obama for America, added, "This is no joke. If we can't keep the money race close, it becomes that much harder to win in November."
We're on track to witness the most expensive presidential election in American history. (Yeah, yeah, I know, they say that every year). In 2008, Obama was Mr. Money Bags, setting fundraising records to beat his Republican rival at the time, Senator John McCain.
Leave a Comment:
Money get back I'm all right Jack Keep your hands off my stack
Money, it's a hit Don't give me that Do goody good bullvhit
I'm in the hi-fidelity First class traveling set And I think I need a Lear jet
Obama set the mark in 2008 by forsaking his pledge for reasonable fund raising and accepting matching public fundsm, going to raise and spend over $750 million dollars in his march to the whitehouse. You reap what you sow!
What is missing in this piece of news is that Romney's $35 million outraising of Obama this last month came by way of 85% small individual contributions to Obama's 72%. That's saying that the people want a change...as these are Mom and Pop contributions coming into the Romney campaign effort.
Sorry Grandpa, but it's back to remedial reading for you again... Or maybe it's remedial math...
Fuzzie claimed, "Romney's $35 million outraising of Obama this last month came by way of 85% small individual contributions to Obama's 72%."
Not so...
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/07/romneys-huge-june-fund-raising-haul.html
The numbers indicate that Romney's campaign is building its house with much bigger bricks than Obama's. Reuters reports that nearly 80 percent of Romney's June contributions came from just six percent of the donations it received, much of them apparently maximum general election contributions in the amount of $2,500.
And of the June haul, roughly 22.3 million, or about 20 percent, came in donations of $250 or less. Meanwhile for Obama, more than 98 percent of the donations to the campaign in June were less than $250, with an average donation of $52.54.
Don't expect any admission of dissembling or error from Grandpa, however. You can expect the usual name calling as he once again pursues his folly of trying to win a swearing contest with a cabbie....
Let's see, if I get your mathamatical equation correct, 6% of the donations mushroomed to 80% of the contributions? You sure you aren't eating the Peyote again, Cab Driver?
I know what statistics were reported on Squack Street yesterday, and that was what I wrote. I'm speaking of the indiviual contriutions, not the bundling of contriutions from the fat cat Wall Streeters or Hollywood Moguls that make up the lion's share of political contributions. And individual contriutions up to $2,500 are "Mom and Pop" contributions. They myth that Obama raised $750 million from mostly contributions of $25 to $250 last year is exactlu that, a myth, He received over $487 million (nearly 2/3rds of his total fund raising) in bundled funds from Wall Street firms playing both sides of the fence. This year the majority of his fund raising has been coming from bundled actors, musicians, atheletes, and assorted liberal socialites, as the business and financial communities have written him off as a losing proposition.
Of course, there is the possiility that the liberal rag NY Mag tried to pass off totals of "internet" only contributions as being the figures that they were providing, but those contributions make up only a small percentage of the total fund raising efforts of both these campaigns, you realize I hope.
So it goes in many Fascist movements: the rich massively fund right-wing candidates, to take over the government "democratically," so it will pass legislation that enriches the rich, gives real power over peoples's lives to the corporations (which are Fascist entities anyway) and impoverishes the middle class and poor.
Ignore the social agenda--funding extreme social movements draws peoples's attention away from the takeover of the government by right-wing Fascists, to the benefit of the rich and the big corporations, which is the real agenda.
What part of 85% of last month's total contriutions to the Romney campaign came from small individual donors didn't you understand, angeleno? And the investor business class that are making large donations don't have a "fascist social adenda", for your illiterate self here's a news flash, "facism" is a form of political economic structure that is based on government control of privately owned institutions of production of goods and services...similar to the Nationalist Socialist Sol Lewinski School of Economics at the University of Chicago that so influenced Obama during his years as a "Community Organizer" and leftist State Legislator and a member of the "New Party" in Illinois. General Motors and Solandra, anybody. There's a good example of that variety of facism at work.
You can ignore what Grandpa is saying, Angeleno... He scored his usual tenth percentile for his claims (there's a strong correlation between his scores and Congress's approval rating).
As for the "Fascist" tactics coming as "social agendas," my view is sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Be wary of black-and-white answers... The power-hungry sorts are resourceful and adaptive with an uncanny ability to delude themselves on issues of their own self-importance and "providential destiny."
The common element is the Big Lie, but in that one, the Internet has become the Colt Peacemaker of the 21st Century. Owning a media outlet simply means being exposed to the withering fire of objective facts.
Geeze Louise? What the hell are you talking about Cab Driver? Can't you think and speak clearly? Or are you just flapping your gums for the sake of making some noise in your lonely existance here?
SL Cabbie: Right--shouldn't universalize. I'm mainly familiar with the American Fascist movements. Here it's true--the rich can go out-of-country to get their abortions, etc. So promoting the reactionary social agenda doesn't affect them. Can't speak with complete authority on the Fascist movements in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, etc.
I just got an e-mail from Moxy Vote that they are closing up shop. I know very little about finances and never consider investing because I don't have the time or money--but I believe this organization was about giving the individual consumer more of a voice in the market place and perhaps a tiny slice of the wealth of this country, or at least a decent shot at it.
I wonder, in this free market enterprise that tried to bring more people in and give them more of a say in what is done with their dollars, why they received so little support from Wall Street and what Romney's people have done to support, or block, such grassroots efforts to incorporate more people into our economy, more people like me.
PS. I just learned the new Healthcare Plan KEEPS my boss' prescription drug plan cost down by nearly 600 dollars (a month or year, not sure) That is what she receives to live on every month and I have to figure out how to deliver her a high quality life style on that budget (her wealthy family expects it.) I rarely have enough latex gloves to change diapers, which ironically is one of the few things my Union was able to guarantee. I also do not have emergency relief and sometimes, less than one day off a month (which is more than I had when I worked for a private, Christian millionaire--0 days off in six months of a 24/7 hospice schedule. Really. Is that what 'more jobs' means for the Romney types.)
Yeah...and Obama promised that everyone's health insurance premiums would fall by $2,500 by the end of this year (and the budget deficit would be cut in half) (and the unemployment rate would be down to 6%) all based on the passage of the (Un)affordale Care Act and the huuuuuuge stimulus as his first orders of business (other than the very first, the closing of Guantanimo). LOL!
It's not very unusual if you have a desire to get ahead in life, and to actually put aside some bucks to be able to invest (or make contributions to a political candidate of your choice) to work 7 days a week. I did it in High School, with a M-F afternoon job typing invoices and packaging shipments of my employer's merchandise, then worked weekends Fri thru Sun ushering and running a concression stand in a movie theatre. And even later in life, after my children were raised and I worked for the Social Work Service of Madigan Army Medical Center at Ft. Lewis, WA full time, Monday thru Friday's and occasionally on weekend call duties, I would work evenings and weekends as an Inventory Control Specialist out of the Tacoma and Seattle Offices of one of the nations leaders in the field. The goal: to put the bucks away for a comfortable retirement.
Keep your nose to the grindstone, and good things will happen in time, Alecto.