ZOMG there's no way the base will donate to Obama after all his betrayals.

Oh wait, sorry...erm...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/obama-raises-record-breaking-86-million/2011/07/13/gIQAOSg6BI_blog.html



nevermind.

There was never any doubt. The meme came from teanutters & Karl Rove proteges who infest progressive sites on the web. It's a new cottage industry, but these numbers prove it's not working. :hi:

those contributions are from labor, how much from those who view themselves as liberal, how much from those who view themselves as moderate, and how much from those who view themselves as conservative.

and there are other categories besides

There are many bases, and if this administration is stupid enough to dis certain elements in that base as they did about a year ago, I don't care how much money they take in, if that doesn't translate to people getting out to vote it means nothing

I would like to remind you there was plenty of money, and we still lost Kennedy's seat

Next, you'll hire Murdoch to hack their phone calls. :sarcasm:

If contributions are heavily eeighted to fat cats who are buying policies that does matter.

So you assume your 'wish' that only fat cats are contributing.

Ah, the benefits of evidence-free speculation. Must be great to be you.

liberal, moderate, and conservative

Ill start you out. I consider myself a progressive and i already donated.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Nobody should stay home and not vote.

I want them to see just how little they matter. I'll laugh.

And much much higher conservative turnout too. Those midterms?

The loud echo chamber rants seem much larger than they are... it's like that warning on your rear view mirror... objects in this mirror are closer than they appear.

Ralph Nader.

Let the shrieking commence.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It really doesn't matter how many are in fives, twenties, or Benjamins.

Seriously... that hair don't need split.

the average contribution was $69, 98 percent of donors gave less than $250 and more than 552,462 people have contributed to the joint committee.

If 98% of 552,462 people gave $69 each, that's a total haul of 37 million dollars.
That would mean the other 49 million is from 2% of the donors. (about 11,000 people)

Who do you think is supporting this candidate? Who has the "clout"? Who is "supporting" this candidate?

But that doesn't mean I'd have any "clout". In 2008, his biggest public/corporate contributor was the University of California. What kind of "clout" do you think they received?

Your insinuation that there is any quid pro quo is not only ludicrous, but it's also completely without merit. It's simply more of the negative speculation that is otherwise known as bullshit.

But the article was suggesting that there was some broad base of support for the 84 million. The majority of that money came from 2% of the contributors. That's no broad base of support. In his own book, Obama mentions that one of his early supporters of his state level campaign was a particular union in Illinois. He admits that because of their early, and significant, support, after he was elected, they had ready access to his office.

That's what that 2% is "buying" with their early support. When the campaign is over, a reasonable estimate is that 60 - 70% of his cash will come from less than 15% of his contributors. That kinda cash comes with "sleep overs in the White House" kinda access.

More than half of the cash came from less than 2% of the contributors.

This was a joint campaign: 56% went to the Obama 2012 campaign, 44% went to the DNC.

An individual is limited to a total of $2,500 in donations to a presidential campaign in a given year. So no one gave more than $2,500 to the actual campaign. The limit on donations to a political party, however, is around $30,000. The big donors still only gave a maximum of $2,500 to the campaign. But they could give a lot more to the DNC coffers. This money is used in part to coordinate with the presidential campaign, but also to fund campaigns of ALL Democrats, up and down the ticket.

Even if the fat cats gave the full $2,500 to the campaign and the full $30,000 to the DNC, this is nothing in comparison to the money that is going to be secretly donated to Republican efforts via Citizen's United: it is UNLIMITED. That is where a Koch brother or a corporation can give $50,000,000 or even $100,000,000 apiece. There is no limit, and there will be no public record of those donations.

By contrast, every bit of the $89 million given to the Obama 2012 campaign and the DNC must be scrupulously reported, donor-by-donor, and may not exceed the legal limits. There were also no donations from PACS or corporate money.

So your calculations were wrong (you have to split up the money somehow; also "averages" must be disentangled). Your point was half-correct: big money talks more than small-donor money. The part you left out is that a handful of multi-billionaires and corporations are going to be giving unlimited cash to the Republicans.

If you think there won't be any "fat cat" donations to the DNC, you're wrong. The RNC will probably do vastly better, and there will a real contest going in the 527 groups.

And Obama controls the DNC, as well as OFA. The point stands, that of the 84 million being reported, 2% of the donors contributed more than half of that sum.

Obama’s re-election campaign raised $47 million while he helped raise another $38 million in contributions from 552,462 donors to the joint committee. We don't know yet how many people have donated just to the Obama campaign but the average contribution was $69 of which 98 percent of donors gave less than $250.

They announced some 84 million, of which the average was $69 and the total contributors were 552,000 people. At best that's about 37 million from the masses. Either the other 10 million was from 2% of the people, or around 41 million was from 2% of the folks. Either way, that's alot of money from very few people.

:P

:toast:

While DU is a great source of good info and I do enjoy the often lively debates here, one cannot construe the feelings and attitude of DU as being the feelings and attitude of the base.

part of his "base", even thought some of them claim to be.

For instance ...

People who want a primary ... NOT part of his base.

People who want a 3rd party ... NOT part of his base.

People who want him to lose ... NOT part of his base.

Replace the word and you get...

People who want a primary ... NOT part of his base anymore.

People who want a 3rd party ... NOT part of his base anymore.

People who want him to lose ... NOT part of his base anymore.

Just, you know... FYI.

Many here who hated Obama as a candidate, as a person, and as a president, still hate him.

Thank God their numbers are vanishingly small, and even thought they make a lot of noise, the vast majority of Democrats don't listen to them...ever.

Yay!