• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The $150 Million Dollar Man

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pookster

Graduate Poster
Pookster
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
1,786
You heard me ... Obama ... $150 million in donations ... in September alone.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27262116/

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama reports raising more than $150 million in September in an unprecedented eruption of political giving.

The influx of money has helped the Illinois senator expand the field of competitive states and has widened his financial advantage over Republican rival John McCain.

The monthly figure pushed Obama's total fundraising to $605 million, unseen before in presidential politics. The campaign offered no details, but must submit a monthly report to the Federal Election Commission on Monday.
Click to expand...


October could be the same. Remember, McCain only has $84 million he can spend between September and the election. This likely will change things in future elections. I can't imagine either candidate restricting themselves to any arbitrary amount.

Discuss.
 
Last edited:
Pookster said:
You heard me ... Obama ... $150 million in donations ... in September alone.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27262116/




October could be the same. Remember, McCain only has $84 million he can spend between September and the election. This likely will change things in future elections. I can't imagine either candidate restricting themselves to any arbitrary amount.

Discuss.
Click to expand...

Certainly a bucketload of money. I think there are diminishing returns on political ads, therefore Obama's advantage is twofold: it allows him to run ads in more markets, thus threatening McCain in his base which McCain can't afford to do to Obama (think Michigan), and it allows Obama more offices, which should help the Dems in get-out-the vote efforts.

Remember that Obama's fundraising advantage is partially compensated by RNC advantages over the DNC.
 
Apparently we are all not as smart as the US Supreme Court and the Bush administration, which has the opinion that limiting campaign money does not limit speech.
 
gdnp said:
Remember that Obama's fundraising advantage is partially compensated by RNC advantages over the DNC.
Click to expand...
The DNC actually stopped spending any money on Obama. All of their cash is going to down-ticket candidates at this point.

The RNC on the other hand, is probably spending all its cash on McCain.

Republicans are really ****ed.
 
Impressive,but if you think all that money came from small contributors, I have some ocean front property in Kansas you might be interested in.
 
Rich people like George Soros, Ted Turner, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet support Obama so no surprise that he has so much money.
 
... Because there's still a cap on how much each individual can donate.
 
....and don't underestimate the influence Oprah has had on this election, both with financial support and enthusiastic vocal support
With millions of folks watching her show I am sure quite a few of those have voted accordingly. Do you agree/disagree (regardless of what you think of the woman!)?
 
Peephole said:
The RNC on the other hand, is probably spending all its cash on McCain.

Republicans are really ****ed.
Click to expand...
Actually I read somewhere that the RNC is shifting its focus to Senate seats in an attempt to keep the Donkeys under 60 seats (too lazy to post links).

Not sure about the ****ed part. I heard a radio interview of Jonathan Altar just a half-hour ago in which he argued that polling data is not to be trusted. First, he stated that response rates for all polling firms was very low and falling like a rock. Then he asserted that there was some evidence that the overshelming majority of those who refused to respond were right-wingers because they largely hold the view that the MSM has a liberal bias so won't participate in their polls.

It was a wide-ranging, interesting discussion but a good cautionary tale.
 
moon1969 said:
Rich people like George Soros, Ted Turner, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet support Obama so no surprise that he has so much money.
Click to expand...

Why is it again that ulta-rich people would be for a Democrat who wants to tax their money?

I think one of the explanations is that they are so rich, that if they lose some of it, it does not matter. That they value the Democrat for other reasons. What are those reasons? What is in it for THEM?
 
Iamme said:
Why is it again that ulta-rich people would be for a Democrat who wants to tax their money?

I think one of the explanations is that they are so rich, that if they lose some of it, it does not matter. That they value the Democrat for other reasons. What are those reasons? What is in it for THEM?
Click to expand...

Maybe...they think Obama would make a better President?
 
Iamme said:
Why is it again that ulta-rich people would be for a Democrat who wants to tax their money?
Click to expand...
Just off the top of my head...

Because they believe in a progressive tax system?

Because issues like abortion rights, global warming, human rights, the rule of law, US standing in the world, health care, etc. matter to them more than tax policy?

Because it is in their interest that the country not go down the tubes?

Why would you assume that the rich choose to vote based entirely on tax policy? Is that how you are choosing a candidate? Entirely on his tax program?
 
Iamme said:
What is in it for THEM?
Click to expand...
There's your problem, right there. Because they can see that what would benefit ME may not benefit the country.

Plus the other spot-on replies above. Trying getting your head out of your only own head and you might see the world a little differently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom