It’s no secret that the Democratic Party is far exceeding many of the
Republican candidates in the fundraising realm. From President Obama’s
high priced soirees to support from Hollywood’s A list, the GOP is
struggling to keep up. However in politics, numbers in the bank don’t
always equal voters in the poll booths.
So with a low approval rating, a poor economy and a low chance of
winning back the House, how in the world are the Democrats able to
create such a money making machine?
First of all, the house GOP majority wants to drastically cut federal
spending but “cuts to federal spending are a hindrance to healthy
fundraising – especially when it comes to picking the pockets of the K
Street donors and interest groups who depend on federal dollars,”
explain Alex Isenstadt and David Catanese on HamptonRoads.com.
Secondly, House Minority Leader Nancy Palosi is an amazing
fundraiser. Since January Pelosi has held 262 fundraising events in 35
cities and two territories, which have raised more than $24.4 million
for House Democrats.
Next, one third of the Republican conference is comprised of first
termers. Many of them don’t have the capitol that seasoned members do or
they are concerned about their reelection bids and are waiting it out a
bit. Also, there’s only so much money to go around: do the big donors
give to GOP power house committees or to independent groups?
Finally, there are 17 Democratic incumbents – more than twice the
number that the GOP must defend. That means there are a lot of
incumbents who already have connections and know which doors to knock
on.
“Republicans, meanwhile, have a collection of competitive and
unsettled GOP fields that are keeping donors on the sidelines. The party
is still searching for clear Senate frontrunners in Missouri, Florida
and Wisconsin – each which currently has at least three GOPers vying for
the nomination,” examines Isenstadt and Catanese.
So will the Republican Party be able to compete in the fundraising
arena or will their lagging numbers be a minor setback once the ballots
are counted? Like with most conundrums, only time will tell.
For more information about this topic, click here: http://bit.ly/ptXOr1
Showing posts with label republican fundraising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label republican fundraising. Show all posts
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
The 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates in Expensive Race, Cheap Primaries
If money makes the world go round, then buckle your seat belts
because the 2012 presidential election is going to have us spinning
fast. Between President Obama’s record breaking fundraising numbers and
the cost of the candidates garnering support on the campaign trail,
gathering dollars to become the future President of the United States is
a billion dollar industry.
However in this pre-election period of spending money to raise money, many Republicans are cutting costs. Is it a reflection of the economic times we are living in or is there another motivation behind the frugality?
On Bloomberg Businessweek, Kristin Jensen and Jonathan D. Salant reported that “Even as experts predict that the 2012 presidential race will be the most expensive in U.S. history, a funny thing is happening on the way to the Republican nomination: It’s becoming one of the cheapest primaries in a more than a decade…The top nine Republican candidates spent $53 million through September, compared with $132 million spent at the same time four years ago. The sum is even lower than totals reported during the same period in the 2004 and 2000 primaries — when most candidates still were abiding by campaign spending limits in order to receive public matching money…In the crowded Democratic primary in 2004, the candidates had spent $58 million through Sept. 30, 2003. Four years earlier, a primary field of 10 Republican candidates had spent $68 million in the first three quarters of 1999.”
So why has the spending levels dropped for these candidates? First of all, there have been an abundance of televised debates (11 so far) which has eliminated the need of expensive commercial time. Secondly, if Obama is the supposed ‘King of Fundraising’, it seems to be that the Republicans are mere peasants in this area. Thirdly, the candidates are more organized and are focused on spending smarter on a smaller budget. With the economy being a major issue, many are showing that they are frugal business people.
Just because fewer dollars are spent does not mean the war for the presidential seat will be less intense than in previous years. If fundraising is the gas, then this political fundraising engine is just getting warmed up and I believe we haven’t even come close to seeing the battle that is ahead.
However in this pre-election period of spending money to raise money, many Republicans are cutting costs. Is it a reflection of the economic times we are living in or is there another motivation behind the frugality?
On Bloomberg Businessweek, Kristin Jensen and Jonathan D. Salant reported that “Even as experts predict that the 2012 presidential race will be the most expensive in U.S. history, a funny thing is happening on the way to the Republican nomination: It’s becoming one of the cheapest primaries in a more than a decade…The top nine Republican candidates spent $53 million through September, compared with $132 million spent at the same time four years ago. The sum is even lower than totals reported during the same period in the 2004 and 2000 primaries — when most candidates still were abiding by campaign spending limits in order to receive public matching money…In the crowded Democratic primary in 2004, the candidates had spent $58 million through Sept. 30, 2003. Four years earlier, a primary field of 10 Republican candidates had spent $68 million in the first three quarters of 1999.”
So why has the spending levels dropped for these candidates? First of all, there have been an abundance of televised debates (11 so far) which has eliminated the need of expensive commercial time. Secondly, if Obama is the supposed ‘King of Fundraising’, it seems to be that the Republicans are mere peasants in this area. Thirdly, the candidates are more organized and are focused on spending smarter on a smaller budget. With the economy being a major issue, many are showing that they are frugal business people.
Just because fewer dollars are spent does not mean the war for the presidential seat will be less intense than in previous years. If fundraising is the gas, then this political fundraising engine is just getting warmed up and I believe we haven’t even come close to seeing the battle that is ahead.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
The 2012 Republican Presidential Candidates in Expensive Race, Cheap Primaries
If money makes the world go round, then buckle your seat belts
because the 2012 presidential election is going to have us spinning
fast. Between President Obama’s record breaking fundraising numbers and
the cost of the candidates garnering support on the campaign trail,
gathering dollars to become the future President of the United States is
a billion dollar industry.
However in this pre-election period of spending money to raise money, many Republicans are cutting costs. Is it a reflection of the economic times we are living in or is there another motivation behind the frugality?
On Bloomberg Businessweek, Kristin Jensen and Jonathan D. Salant reported that “Even as experts predict that the 2012 presidential race will be the most expensive in U.S. history, a funny thing is happening on the way to the Republican nomination: It’s becoming one of the cheapest primaries in a more than a decade…The top nine Republican candidates spent $53 million through September, compared with $132 million spent at the same time four years ago. The sum is even lower than totals reported during the same period in the 2004 and 2000 primaries — when most candidates still were abiding by campaign spending limits in order to receive public matching money…In the crowded Democratic primary in 2004, the candidates had spent $58 million through Sept. 30, 2003. Four years earlier, a primary field of 10 Republican candidates had spent $68 million in the first three quarters of 1999.”
So why has the spending levels dropped for these candidates? First of all, there have been an abundance of televised debates (11 so far) which has eliminated the need of expensive commercial time. Secondly, if Obama is the supposed ‘King of Fundraising’, it seems to be that the Republicans are mere peasants in this area. Thirdly, the candidates are more organized and are focused on spending smarter on a smaller budget. With the economy being a major issue, many are showing that they are frugal business people.
Just because fewer dollars are spent does not mean the war for the presidential seat will be less intense than in previous years. If fundraising is the gas, then this political fundraising engine is just getting warmed up and I believe we haven’t even come close to seeing the battle that is ahead.
However in this pre-election period of spending money to raise money, many Republicans are cutting costs. Is it a reflection of the economic times we are living in or is there another motivation behind the frugality?
On Bloomberg Businessweek, Kristin Jensen and Jonathan D. Salant reported that “Even as experts predict that the 2012 presidential race will be the most expensive in U.S. history, a funny thing is happening on the way to the Republican nomination: It’s becoming one of the cheapest primaries in a more than a decade…The top nine Republican candidates spent $53 million through September, compared with $132 million spent at the same time four years ago. The sum is even lower than totals reported during the same period in the 2004 and 2000 primaries — when most candidates still were abiding by campaign spending limits in order to receive public matching money…In the crowded Democratic primary in 2004, the candidates had spent $58 million through Sept. 30, 2003. Four years earlier, a primary field of 10 Republican candidates had spent $68 million in the first three quarters of 1999.”
So why has the spending levels dropped for these candidates? First of all, there have been an abundance of televised debates (11 so far) which has eliminated the need of expensive commercial time. Secondly, if Obama is the supposed ‘King of Fundraising’, it seems to be that the Republicans are mere peasants in this area. Thirdly, the candidates are more organized and are focused on spending smarter on a smaller budget. With the economy being a major issue, many are showing that they are frugal business people.
Just because fewer dollars are spent does not mean the war for the presidential seat will be less intense than in previous years. If fundraising is the gas, then this political fundraising engine is just getting warmed up and I believe we haven’t even come close to seeing the battle that is ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)