Obama's Haul & memo

Obama "raised at least $32.5 million including at least $31 million that we can spend on the battle for the Democratic nomination."

Impressive; I wonder how much came from the internet.

This is an interesting memo that Obama's has released and aimed at his supporters. It's notable that in that it doesn't carry the light language that has been typical coming from the Obama's campaign-- it actually talks a bit tougher and takes on the perceived front-runner status of Clinton (though wierdly refering to her as "the quasi-incumbent" instead of just by name). Mainly by showing from history that the polls haven't been predictive of whom is going to win the Democratic nomination in the past. But it would also be instructive to add, following Dean in '04, that neither has the one with the most money been who won either. You do have to reach a threshold to win the nomination, but more money doesn't do you any more good in Iowa. In 2003, Kerry needed just $5M the final three months of the campaign to win in Iowa.

The memo also attempts to take on Edwards (though without any poll reference of the claim) by stating over the issue of electability that:

If we prevail in the nomination fight, there is mounting evidence that Barack Obama would be the strongest general election candidate. Barack is consistently the strongest Democrat with independents in general election polling, who are the voters that are the pathway to the presidency. Barack also has a 2-1 fav/unfav with general election voters, which is also the best score in the Democratic field. That strength with independents, plus what would likely be very strong Democratic turnout across the country as a result of an Obama candidacy, also likely puts more states in play. We cannot afford another election where we have to run the table to win the Electoral College.
Indeed.



Display:


My take. (1.00 / 0)

You are absolutely wrong to assume broader online donations are an indicative of broad support.

For a family who earn less than $40,000, $30,000, do you believe they have the luxury to go online and hit to 'donation' button for an American idol type of candidate?

Polls after polls have shown Hillary is the overwhemling favourite among low-income democratic primary voters, which unfortunately are called 'low-information' voters by elitists on this site. These voters just do not donate to any candidate, period.

John Kerry had far more online donations than George W. Bush. Based on your logic, he should have beaten W. by a mile, unfortunately, George W. Bush has won not only general, but also among low-income voters


by kostner on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:33:43 PM EST

Re: My take. (3.00 / 3)

What's up with the "ou" in "favorite"?  Are you a foreign national?  Can you even vote in this election?


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:36:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

lol...nice catch


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hilllary's internet outreach (3.00 / 2)

from bangalore, India.

they use British spellings....


McCain - a serial Opportunist, from marriage to policy positions
by TarHeel on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:04:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

lol ... Punjab is my guess (none / 0)


by jforshaw on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:04:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Where did that strange inference of assumption, "broader online donations are an indicative of broad support" come from?

Based on your logic, anything can be assumed from anything stated.


by Jerome Armstrong on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:38:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Sorry, I was not responding to you. It's copied from my comment under another diary.


by kostner on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:39:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 5)

Whoever you are, you need to stop it.  Unless you can move the conversation, don't contribute.  This writing, and I am a writer, is very similar to carolinehanz, maseoda, etc.  


"I want my voice to be read"
by icebergslim on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:46:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Yep. Thanks for the cue. Done.


by Jerome Armstrong on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:48:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 1)

Nice post, Jerome.  However, the nature of conversation in the preceeding thread utterly confuses me.

What is or isn't acceptable dialogue on MyDD?

From what I can see, kostner stated a divergent opinion regarding your post.  In his opinion, however, he makes no ad hominem attacks or anything that can be construed as vitriolic.

He is then accused of being "foreign" and unable to vote by Vox Populi, which is echoed by rapcetera.  Then, icebergslim declares his contribution to be of no value and, in a self-appointed omnipotence, declares to know that kostner is one of multiple identies.  Then, icebergslim troll-rates two of kostners postings.

Finally, you seem to support the ad hominem attacks on kostner by thanking those for the "cue"?  (Maybe I misunderstood the actual meaning of "Yep.  Thanks for the cue.  Done.")

I don't have a dog in this fight, and I don't necessarily agree with kostner.  However, if I am reading this exchange correctly, divergent views respectfully stated are not to be tolerated here at MyDD and ad hominem attacks are to not only tolerated, but encouraged by MyDD itself.

Again, maybe I'm misreading this, and I apologize if I am.  But the standards and guidlines for posting here seem to be very subjective, and oftentimes determined by the choice of candidate, rather than rather than the content of the posts themselves.

Thanks for hearing me out.

PS:  $32.5M + $27M + $9M + $7M is GREAT news for all the Dems!


by BigBoyBlue on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:47:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 1)

kostner has made plenty of vitriolic, attacking, ad hominem, not to mention just plain pointless, posts recently and is also suspected of being another incarnation of a previously banned poster.  I am content that Jerome's action is justified.

Having said that I actually thought there was some redeeming qualities to some of his/her posts recently.  Que sera sera.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:56:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 1)

He's calling the Obama supporters elitists.  But his facts are a little off.  People are saying Hillary's support comes from low-info voters because there was a poll showing she had stronger women support from people who haven't gone to college, whereas the women vote of women who have gone to college was split almost evenly between the two candidates.  That's why people are saying she has strong support among low-info voters, although college/income are probably co-related, but again, he's taking our side wrong and calling us elitists for his misinterpretation.  Yes it's an insult, he's trying to incinuate that we think we're better than everyone else and we don't understand the problems of the average person.  

As for some of Obama's elitists... Check these out.  (SORRY some are on a donation page.  I didn't know where else to find some of these videos)
https:/donate.barackobama.com/page/cont ribute/eoq2gregory
https:
/donate.barackobama.com/page/cont ribute/eoq2mario
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community /post_group/ObamaHQ/CXxD


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

The first two didn't come out right...
Http://
Some of these things like using * and / make things, when I want to use the symbol and not some different style.  
by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:59:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tools (none / 0)

The people who run the show here have tools, not available to the average user, which can help them determine if someone is or is not a troll. It's their blog and their call to axe anyone at any time.

We all have "free speech" in that we can start our own blog - people can show up to read what we write, or not.


543,895 votes
by Michael Bersin on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:53:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

he probably just looked at the IP Address and realized it was the same person who had been posting nonsense attacks under the other handles mentioned in icebergslim's comment

and damn, that was a good catch, icebergslim


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 06:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 1)

Yes, I do have that luxury and I have hit that DONATION button more than once.

Thank you for being so concerned. Although, the difference between myself and Clinton supporters is, I know what the hell is going on in this race and I have done my research as opposed to just watch the News and let Chris Matthews tell me how to vote.


by FreedomOFSpeechFromTheDNC on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:52:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Is my math f*cked, or did Obama get $124 per donor?

That hardly seems like a fortune, though it might to someone in Punjab.


by Bush Bites on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:39:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Ah, yeah, my math is f*cked.

It was more like $207 per donor.


by Bush Bites on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 05:42:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (3.00 / 4)

So it is okay for you to call Obama an "american idol type of candidate, but it is not okay for us to refer to some voters as "low-information voters?"

I hate to break it to you, but that is what MANY, MANY voters are. Whether by choice or by circumstance there is a large population of voters who do not research candidates, engage in serious discussion about candidate, watch debates, or do anything similar. They vote based on name ID, and the little bits of information that seep into their daily life. This doesn't make them bad people, it just means (again whether by choice or circumstance,) that they are not as tuned in politically, as the people who devote more time and attention to the democratic process.

I know you may not like it, because you are supporting the candidate who is currently leading among this type of voter but the truth is that is Hillary's base. If any candidate fits the mold of the "American Idol candidacy", and I don't believe any of them do in reality, it would be HRC.  


ENOUGH!
by JDF on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:02:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

Well, Clinton leads in pretty much every category, but her lead is as strong (if not even stronger) in the "highest engaged" category.  Yes, she also leads in the "least engaged" category.  Where the others make some inroads is in the "somewhat engaged" category.  


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:37:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My take. (none / 0)

It does make me wonder what percentage of these 'low info' voters actually vote?   I don't have the numbers and have not seen them if they are available.


by soros on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 12:42:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Dean (1.00 / 0)

Dean is very savy in attracting online donations. They also claimed to attract new voters, indepdents despite polls showed the opposite.

The end result was that despite the money advantage, Dean crashed and burned. Most online donors are really in the 'elitists' category of primary voters. This alone will never help the candidate to win an election.


by kostner on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:36:03 PM EST

Re: Dean (1.00 / 2)

Somehow i can't picture Obama screaming "heeeeeeeehaaaaaaaah!!" on national television. I remember seeing that on TV (after the Iowa Caucus results came in), and immediately knew Dean was done. Dean did himself in. Obama will not.


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:46:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (3.00 / 4)

The media did Dean in.  Get your facts straight.


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:00:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (none / 0)

sorry, but i disagree. I did not need the media to replay the scream over and over again, to dissuade me. It wasn't a good look the minute it came out of his mouth. Hate to say it, but it wasn't Presidential.  


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:31:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (none / 0)

I thought the Dean Scream was unfair.

He was in a big room, people were yelling, he was trying to rev up the crowd after a poor showing.

I just hope all Dems learn from that one: Don't yell if the camera and mikes are on. Play to the TV audience, no matter what's going on in the room.


by Bush Bites on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (none / 0)

I did too. But, I was actually happy to see Dean go down. I know that's sick and wrong, but I was supporting John Edwards at the time and well, I was so desperate to see him go up in the polls and I wanted him to win. That's why I understand how Edwards supporters today feel even though I am not supporting John this time. I get why they are so obsessed with attacking other candidates and relishing in any mistakes they may make.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:27:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (3.00 / 1)

Flashback.. Media coverage 2004...

Every time George Bush opens his mouth a stream of semi-coherent mangled English prose escapes.  

And to the Media he is a strong resolute leader, a man of the people.

Howard Dean, articulate and capable of forming grammatically correct sentences, gives a yell at a campaign stop and the Media decide that he is unfit to be president.  

You're right, Hildog,  Its was all Dean's fault.


John McCain loves war.
by Winston Smith on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:41:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean (3.00 / 3)

Let's remember that the infamous Dean Scream happened AFTER the Iowa caucus vote.  So the point is true that, going into the Iowa Caucus, Dean had the most money, the biggest online organizaiton, and quite possibly the most high-profile endorsements, and he still lost.

My impression was that this loss came from a combination of factors (including other candiates, and the RWCM, targeting him), not the least of which was his own campaign being wildly disorganized.  Still, this does prove the point that the most money and largest organization are not in and of themselves sufficient to win.

My own 2 cents is that, after placing third in Iowa, Dean was done no matter what.  A large part of his argument was "I have all of these volunteers and money that that's going to mean more votes," and once Iowa showed he couldn't deliver a lot of the rationale for his candidacy (for people who weren't hard-core supporters) went away.


Get a Vegetarian Starter Kit and a Dem. Party Mastercard
by Go Vegetarian on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:50:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that was unfair (none / 0)

what happened to dean sucked. Yes, he didn't looked pre-packaged and "Presidential," and maybe he should have let a surrogate do the firing up, but he shouldn't have been portrayed as "crazy guy." The media probably had his mic plugged into a malt box that fed the audio and didn't pick up on the sound from the crowd.

However, it did make for a really funny Chappelle's Show skit

"we're going to california, to new mexico, we're going to cancun for spring break, and i'm gonna take my wife, bend her over and go BYEAAH!!!"

haha, it also makes fun of the john edwards "you know dick cheney has a lesbian daughter" comment during the debate. awkward, but chappelle makes it hilarious (not only is his daughter a lesbian, but his MOM's a lesbian, his SISTER's a lesbian...)

hilarious


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 06:23:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's Obama with an "m" (none / 0)

Please correct the headline. Thanks.


by horizonr on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:38:37 PM EST

Re: It's Obama with an "m" (none / 0)

he's starting to step it up now, in this email he came very close to asserting Hillary is unelectable, I think he's going to to take a shot at her in Iowa in that regard.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:41:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

god I hope so (3.00 / 1)

Hillary is a disaster for Democrats up and down the ticket.

Sabato's piece, said even if Hillary wins, because of her style in 2010 she would definitely make it hard to hold onto congress.


McCain - a serial Opportunist, from marriage to policy positions
by TarHeel on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:07:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: god I hope so (none / 0)

because of her style in 2010 she would definitely make it hard to hold onto congress.

This is important and only reinforce how important it is that we beat Hillary. It might actually be better for Democrats if she lost the general election after winning the primaries.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:26:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are kidding, right? (3.00 / 1)

"It might actually be better for Democrats if she lost the general election after winning the primaries."

It might be better to stay in Iraq for another four years?

It might be better to have a couple more anti-abortion Supreme Court justices?

It might be better to have another four years of gutted funding for education, health care, civil rights?

Tell me you are kidding? Have you listened to what the Republican candidates are saying?


by hwc on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:30:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are kidding, right? (none / 0)

It miaght be better to just vote for Obama and win the general - so we don't have to deal with any of these things.  Plus, get ethics reform/health care/ a balanced middle east policy


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:34:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are kidding, right? (none / 0)

He didn't say who she'd lose the GE to.  I'm thinking if Bloomberg were to run, and Hillary was the nominee, I could go for that.  Bloomberg is Liberal on a significant amount of the important social issues.  

Nevertheless, I think we should just end this tirade in the primaries and let God do the rest.  The GE will be cake for any Democrat.  2008 will be as bad for Republicans as 2006 was.  Republicans aren't being funded as well as they used to be.


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:36:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are kidding, right? (none / 0)

If liberals split their vote between Bloomberg and the Dem nominee then the GOP could still slither into the oval office.

Remember 2000?


by Sam I Am on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 01:59:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Without taking a position on HRC here: (none / 0)

"It might actually be better for Democrats if she lost the general election after winning the primaries." It might be better to stay in Iraq for another four years? It might be better to have a couple more anti-abortion Supreme Court justices? It might be better to have another four years of gutted funding for education, health care, civil rights?

Well, look at it this way. Agree or disagree with the following statement: It would have been better for the Republicans, as a movement, if Bush had lost to Kerry in 2004.


by mcc on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 02:57:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I also read the email as a clear (none / 0)

shot at Hillary.

there' some tangential stuff maybe at Edwards but the media doesn't really care about him


McCain - a serial Opportunist, from marriage to policy positions
by TarHeel on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:08:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

he better be planning to go after her (3.00 / 4)

She is playing it safe, playing not to lose. Obama needs to make the case against her. He hasn't done so yet.

Hillary at the top of the ticket instantly would put our House and Senate majorities at risk, and if we didn't lose them in 2008 we could very well lose them in 2010.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:24:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

finally a fair front-page post about Obama! (none / 0)

thank you.


Obama! because 51% isn't enough!
by nevadadem on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:39:30 PM EST

Re: Obana's 30 Million (3.00 / 5)

I don't see how that quote refers to Edwards but that doesn't matter.  There needs to be some thought given to the different dynamics of this year's earlier Primary schedule.  With the fundraising gap becoming so enormous I don't see how someone will be able to capitalize on a surprising early showing as they have in years past.  For me the key quote of the Plouffe release is:


First, we are on a financial course that will allow us to both fully fund efforts in the early primary and caucus states, and also participate vigorously in all the February 5 contests, including large states like California, New Jersey, New York, Georgia and Missouri...

Secondly, because so many states are holding early contests that may have significant impact on deciding the ultimate Democratic nominee, a winning campaign will need deep organizations in dozens of states to prevail. Our more than 258,000 donors provide us the foundation of an unprecedented volunteer army in all 50 states. We also have thousands more who are not able to contribute but are already volunteering or who plan too. For example, early in June, more than 10,000 Americans took part in our "Walk for Change" -- canvassing neighborhoods in all 50 states, visiting more than 350,000 households.



by Doug Dilg on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:41:42 PM EST

Re: Obana's 30 Million (3.00 / 1)

Yeah, well, if they were building the plane while it's headed down the runway I think we just had rotation.  From the Plouffe memo:


Frankly, when we entered this race, we did not think [participation in all the February 5 contests] was possible. We estimated at this point of the campaign we'd be at least $20-25 million behind one of our fellow candidates.

[...]

Six months into the race, we simply could not be in a better position. We have built a powerful, well funded grassroots movement and strong organizations in each of the critical early states.

Fasten your seat belts and put your trays in the upright position.  In flight entertainment will be "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" starring Harry Belafonte...


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:20:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

An interesting watch on MTP (none / 0)

Chuck Todd was stating that the Clinton Campaign was running at 70 mph, while Obama is running 50 mph.  I don't know what this means, but I think they are running the kind of campaign they want to, and everything is going along in segments.  I am telling you, this campaign does not seem to be worried.  That was the first instinct I got listening to that conference call, so these numbers are not shocking me.  They EXPECTED it.  Now they are going to ramp it up.  Watch.


"I want my voice to be read"
by icebergslim on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:43:45 PM EST

Re: An interesting watch on MTP (3.00 / 1)

yes, he's running a general election campaign in a primary. I'll be curious to see if he starts running for Dems now, although I'm sure he's hoping his support among independents will carry him in NH, but it just doesn't seem to be bearing out in the polls.


by Todd Beeton on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:09:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He must prove that he can win despite the racists (none / 0)

Because of his skin color he really has to (work twice as hard) to prove that he is electable.  The first balck president and all that.  There is a large voting bloc that will never ever support him.  He has to demonstrate that he can win despite the racists.

This is a significant challenge to his campaign--electability.  Once he has demonstrated convincingly that he can win the White House then he can go after Hillary.  There is a huge bloc of progressives and african americans who have not committed to Obama yet--they will support him in droves once he has proven that he can beat back the racists in this country and put together a winning coalition with dems, independants, and left leaning gop.

It is a smart strategy.  It is essential that he not be the progressive candidate or the black candidate or the maverick.  He has to win the middle and then work left.

Call it a general election strategy if you want.  It is like the movement thing--all semantics.


by aiko on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 06:22:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An interesting watch on MTP (none / 0)

I do think at some point the Obama campaign is going to have to kind of take the lead out. They're raising an enormous amount of money and spending most of it, but they don't seem to be making any real gains or doing anything visible I can see-- really they seem to just be falling off consistently in the polls as we get further and further from Obama's spate of free positive coverage right after he announced. What I'm hoping is happening is that they're spending all that money on setting up infrastructure that will pay off once we get close to the primaries, at which point they'll cut loose and start making a big impact. But it's really hard to tell whether that's where they're headed.

I do hope they know what they're doing. Raising the most money maybe doesn't make such a difference if you don't know what to do with it.


by mcc on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 12:39:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An interesting watch on MTP (none / 0)

Given that Obama's campaign has organized the largest rallies and fundraisers across the country, and that they have had to simultaneously build their entire infrastructure fron the ground up over the last five months, I find your point a little difficult to comprehend.  

Obama just started adverstising in Iowa.  Watch and see if his numbers start to move again. Obama has the most potential for growth over the next six months.


by upper left on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 02:38:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

in primary cash.

F'ing impressive.


by jforshaw on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:43:46 PM EST

Re: Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

how'd u figure that?


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:50:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

Penn said that she had raised about $21 million for the primary, and $6 mil for the general. Obama has raised $31mil for the primary and another $1.5 mil for the general.


by jforshaw on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:05:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

Hey how do you know that


by bebe on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:50:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

you must have some info or are you just throwing numbers out there


by bebe on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:51:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama outraised HRC by $10million (none / 0)

Hillary's camp has said they will have about 27 Million, 20 million for the Primary

Hillary
Q1: 21+10 mil. (Senate account)
Q2: 20 (Supposedly)
(about 14 million GE cash)
Total primary cash: 51 million

Obama
Q1: 24-25 Million
Q2: 31 Million
(2-2.5 million GE Cash)
Total Primary Cash: 55-56 million

He's outraised her by 15 million total now when it comes to primary money.  The buffer from the senate account makes it less noticeable.  Not to mention, Obama's campaign just created a 2Q fundraising record.  Good job Democrats for beating Bush one more way.  :-)


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:07:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 2)

The "quasi-incumbent" line is just weird.  It sounds like something that came out of a too long strategy meetings, and should have stayed there.

His point about electiability is just spin, Obama is doing less well than Edwards in most head to head polls, such as Rasmussen.  He does pull well against Democratic leaning indies in the primaries, but those are a whole different breed than the swing voters (more wealthy, socially liberal, but too 'intellectual' to admit they are Democrats).  


by MassEyesandEars on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:52:27 PM EST

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

It does provide an interesting view into how they are looking at the campaign though... They are running as if they are running against an incumbent.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:22:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

In the primary they basically are.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:28:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good reality check Jerome (none / 0)

I need to be careful. I am praising MYDD too much today.


by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:00:29 PM EST

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

We don't know the Clinton numbers yet.  I had expected about $35 Million for Obama, so this is a bit lower than I had pegged.   I believe the "somewhere in the $27 Million range" is low balling it by the Clinton campaign, so I would not be surprised to actually see her outraise Obama by a tad in the final tally.   My hunch:  About $33 to $34 Million for the Clinton campaign.  We'll see.

As for the argument in the memo:  The fitting statement is "IF we prevail in the nomination fight.   That is a huge if.  Obama does not have the highest favorables amongst Democrats, usually he shows the lowest of all 3 top-tier candidates.  He has to change that dramatically to have a chance.  

There was an interesting article by Mary Mitchell in today's Chicago Sun-Times this morning on how Obama focusing on being the transcendental appears to hurt him with the people in the trenches, in this case the African-American community:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/45 0441,CST-NWS-mitch01.article

Obama can't take Blacks for granted

Quoting:

It's time for Sen. Barack Obama to define his message to African Americans if he hopes to tighten his grip on the black vote.

And trust me, he needs to tighten it.
.....
It is understandable that Obama doesn't want to be pigeonholed as the so-called black candidate, but he can't be so afraid of that label that he alienates the very base that could lift him in the primary election.

Frankly, his universalist strategy might work for white voters, but black voters have been taken for granted long enough. If Obama's handlers don't understand this, then he ought to be looking for some new strategists.

More important, Obama was in the perfect position to show that being pro-black doesn't mean someone has to be anti-white. I'm disappointed that he doesn't appear to know that real progress on the racial front ought to mean that political candidates who are embraced by white voters don't have to keep their distance from black ones.

End of quote


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:08:05 PM EST

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

George, I read that, get the paper, in the Chicagoland area.  This is not a nail on the coffin.  The Black Vote is split.  There is no doubt that the AA's are split between Clinton and Obama.  I hear is all the time.  But they are WATCHING carefully, and this is an added plus for black folk.  If he can raise monies to compete, this transcends to black folk, that he can possibly WIN.  So, I read this article YESTERDAY and it is in my roundup.  He knows what he needs to do, had missteps in Q2, this campaign is turning now.  And please don't talk about black issues, unless you are one, many understood what was going on Thursday.  How?  Many talked about Clinton's one-liner about HIV and Obama's about the justice system being about everyone and not JUST US.  See, we have many AA males in this unjust system, so we KNOW about it.  Many admire Senator Obama, totally, and there is no "he is too young or not ready" among us.  To keep it real, is anyone ready for this?  And they love the Clintons, but now the question is being raised, she ain't Bill.  Yes, this is the conversation that is going on among us, my mother, father, etc.  Die hard democrats, but who understand what Senator Obama MEANS to us.


"I want my voice to be read"
by icebergslim on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:23:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 3)

"And please don't talk about black issues, unless you are one..."

Preposterous and highly offensive.

  I guess I'll keep that in mind for future exchanges.   This level of discourse makes no sense to me, an attempt to "shut down" those you disagree with.  Not interested in the least in that type of stuff, so should be nobody who is interested in discussion rather than romper room "shouting."


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:29:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

Besides, the argument was made by MARY MITCHELL.  Is she black enough for you?    

Geez.  


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:34:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (none / 0)

Obama has to tread carefully regarding the AA vote but he also has to chip away at some of Hillary's female support.  I still believe it is the women in this country who are going to push Hillary right over the top, and having canvassed for Hillary, I see more and more women coming onboard for her.  And these are not web savvy women.  Some have one computer in their homes for their kids to do schoolwork.  So I write the url to Hillary's websites down for them and tell them to check it out.  But do they?  I have canvassed for Hillary in NY, PA and Iowa.  And I head back to Iowa in August to voluteer again.


by samueldem on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 04:45:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (3.00 / 1)

My circumstantial experience confirms your view about the women's vote for Hillary, it is significant, but it is also the first response, not necessarily the long view.  I still think that the most Obama's best move was the opening forced error on her, declaring in January.  Ha.  She must have spat chips for weeks.  (Remember her 'announcement' video?  Have another look, it's mighty green outside for January in Westchester).  

I don't think a long campaign was in her playbook until Obama, who needed one, declared.


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:29:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (none / 0)

think Obama's best move was


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 05:31:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

this is not to shut down a level of discourse, and I agree with much of the article.  But I am not going to start writing what is beneficial for the gay community and I don't live there or is not gay.  And you know, better than anyone, that I am totally fair and level headed, period.  That is just like I had to REMIND a person who was on a rant, about all the money for Katrina, and this "white male" view point of we wasting it there.  Yes, I spoke up because those "people" are part of my people and family.  Unless you have BEEN there, this person NOT, lived there, how can you even fathom what it is like there.  It is the same for the AA community.  Everyone just think that Obama is going to get our vote, NOT.  He has to earn it.  Just because he is BLACK, does not mean he is going to do "right by us", period.  And Clinton, just because she was MARRIED to the former president, don't mean we are flocking to the polls because of her last name.  NOT.  She got to get from behind Bill and tell us what she is going to do.  Period.  This was a good article because though, focused on Obama, Clinton ain't a LOCK on us either.


"I want my voice to be read"
by icebergslim on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:36:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 3)

I have a lot of respect for Mary Mitchell, as I have also a lot of respect for other gifted black writers like Leonard Pitt's jr.   I rserve the right to link to any article they write, regardless of the fact that I don't have the "right" color for your tastes.  In fact, how exactly do YOU know what color I am?  I never made statements related to my skin color, so how exactly would you know what mine is?  

For you to state that I can't link to articles from black writers because you assume that I am not black (but a black person could) is absolutely wrong.  I am not going into the reverse-racism shit here, but I would have thought you knew better than making a ridiculous statement like the above.  

And, absolutely, when it comes to gay issues, I reserve the right to discuss that topic, even though I myself am not gay.  


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:55:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm Black (1.50 / 4)

No,

You can post links to whatever Black Uncle Tom Hillary supporter you want to. But, as an AFRICAN AMERICAN, I have every right to not only be suspicious of you, but I also have the right to reject what you have to say because yes, you are not Black and it's annoying when people like you who are not Black think they have supreme knowledge about how we vote and what we think. There is only one reason why you posted that story and one reason only and you know exactly where you can shove it!

BTW: I happen to know you are not Black .


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:26:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm Black (none / 0)

I rated your comment to give other posters the opportunity to reply but I am not comfortable with either your position or George's, frankly.

Of course you are entitled to be suspicious and reject George's remarks, Lord knows, but if we start  negating one another's legitimacy on the basis of our race, either way, we are taking a big leap backwards.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:50:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm Black (none / 0)

That's fine. I'm still rejecting it. I have had it with people only talking about Black issues when it's election time like they are an expert. I'm sure if you heard "White men are this , that and the other" every single election by Blacks and women, it would annoy you too.

Maybe not.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:50:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm Black (none / 0)

It would, especially if I was white, which as it happens, I mostly am.


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 12:19:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm Black (none / 0)

Don't worry.

I know what you meant and what you were trying to say. Many Blacks feel that way no matter who doesn't like it or agree. When people start acting like they know the Black Community better than Blacks, it's offensive. Maybe you could have made the point better , but you are still right.


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 01:06:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

easy George....


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:38:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

easy George....


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:38:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

easy slim ;)


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:38:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 3)

I've been really active in AA politics around Houston - and my since, is that they are split right now - but will break towards Obama.  I've seen a lot of local primary races where the AA community appears to be split, and then break heavily toward the AA candidate shorty before the election - I think radio has a lot to do with this, and communication within churches, watch the pastors - Obama has held several events for people of faith, and this is why - Hillary isn't so goog at going into Black Churches (Bill could) with much success.  And, there are things Obama can talk openly about and Hillary can't surrounding race.  Obama's Cosby like language does, contrary to what some people say, play well with AA voters (maybe not the broader AA population like Russel Simmons) but with those who go to the polls it goes over very well - I have heard Black candadites use this language for years now... Lastly, Obama directly calling out black fathers is going to be the deal breaker I think - that group does not really vote - and his policy based plans to incrourage family will make a huge differince (this is one of the issues Hillary would have a hard time handling).

Michelle Obama, if you saw her in Harlem last week, does great in AA crowds - for some it may be a question if Barack is really part of the community, but there is no question about Michelle.  

Also a huge trait of AA voters is to claim that they are "independent" or "undecided" until the last week - at which point they vote 90% democratic.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:40:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 2)

i am white but have been an organizer and advocate in the black community for years.  i just went thru the mfume campaign where the white dem power supported the white guy (in a state that is 35% black) and mfume came within an inch of winning. for fun i track the black vote.  I am quite certain that blacks will break for obama if/when he is seen as electable.  At 20+ percent in the polls he is not there yet.

The pride in the black community if we were to elect a black president would be overwhelming.  

But he will never be the 'black president.' It is not his style. He will be the president who happens to be black. His mother is white and he did grow up in Kansas.  This guy is not your typical black candidate and he is not running your typical campaign.


by aiko on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 06:41:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

Yeah, I was in D.C. for the MD campaign - I was sorry to see him lose.

I think Michelle will definetly be the first Black first lady - Not the first black first mistress ie Thomas Jefferson.

There cover on Ebony was the best selling in Ebony history, btw.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 07:06:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & (none / 0)

really? did not know that...


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 08:38:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

love your comment, but quick correction - Obama grew up in Hawaii and then Indonesia. He was sent back to Hawaii for high school, then he left for California to attend Occidental college, transffered to Columbia University in New York, moved to Chicago to become a community organiser after graduation (for 3 years), left for Harvard law in Boston, and then finally moved back to Chicago to set-up shop.

His Mother ,Stanley-Ann Dunham,was born in Kansas and grew up there for part of her early child hood, but the family up'd and moved to Washington State and then finally to Hawaii where she met Barack Obama sr. in college.


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 08:38:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul &am (none / 0)

my bad. Hawaii, Kansas...not exactly bastions of african american culture...


by aiko on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:41:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 3)

I'm not Black, but have spent a lot of time working campaigns where I'm the only white person there - and for you to just pull a couple of quotes from this article is rediculous george.  White people saw a completely different conversation than the AA community thursday.  Hillary compared white to blacks - Obama talked at several points directly about issues black families face - it plays a lot differently...

Black academia has been slow to come to Obama - but the religous groups are starting to break hard toward him.  Churches, not Tavis smiley, Cornell West, Robert Taylor, are the life blood of the community...  

I think faith based initiatives could be a potential issue of importance this year... If they are done through interfaith councils I strongly support them - Interfaith councils, in some form or another, are groups in large cities (Saul Alinsky pioneered) they put out issue cards on canidates and do a lot of community building efforts.  Obama worked for an interfaith council while in Chicago.  I'm not sure if Hillary supports faith-based initiatives or not.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:53:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

No, it is not.  The quotes I "pulled" from the article pertain to the issue raised.  The middle section of the article went into exactly what Obama did wrong in the debate and what Hillary nailed, which I found to be not as interesting to this particular diary.   There is nothing "pulled" or "falsified" from Mitchell's article.  The section left out is even more negative towards Obama's chosen track.  


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:58:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

My apologies - I head the article with commentary... then the article is simply incorrect - So what Danny Glover as sided with Edwards?  Morgan Freeman is close to Obama? And, we all knew that Hillary can Bill were close to prominent members of the AA community.  Who cares, we can pull famous black people's names out of a hat all day.

The fact is that this article, and I'm not sure why Mitchell wrote this way, doesn't accuretly demonstrate AA voting patterns... Hillary was/is a white women trying to show she cares about black women.  Obama is a black man who throughout the debate talked about issue specific things, with solutions, to adress the problems.  Hillary has a tendency (I think it is deliberate) to be asked a question and then spend the next minute rhetorically bemoaning the issue presented - it is really frustrating to watch.

I forgot to mention all the recent Fl/S.C./ and GA polls show Obama tracking up in the AA community - those are the states he has been campaigning in too.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:21:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (none / 0)

I am white but, for some reason (I won't do into), have always been interested in AAs and their struggles for opportunity and equality.  

I have worked as a drug counselor in an all black, grassroots church based residential drug treatment program for homeless, drug addicted men.  I loved the work and I loved my clients.

I have a question for anyone who might be reading this who is AA.  How did you, personally, receive Hillary Clinton's take on AIDs and the AA community?  

Thanks for responding.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 08:30:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (3.00 / 1)

I'm an African American female and while I may not be personally infected, I am deeply and emotionally effected by the fact that my very demographic is suffering a deadly epidemic and for Hillary Clinton to take it lightly by pandering instead of talking about the real problem, insulted and enraged me. She has gone too far. Way too far. I was upset when she would mock the way southern Blacks talked thinking it was cool, but now, I just find her downright offensive. My people are dying for a lack of knowledge about HIV/AIDS and pandering will not cure that. Obama and Biden were the only the who actually addressed the problem, even with the humor,( I hit the floor laughing when Obama said "I got tested with MICHELLE!") they at least, still addressed the actual problem.

P.S.

I swear to God. I better not have some NON-BLACK Person responding to this telling me I shouldn't feel the way I feel about Hillary either! You have been warned!

;p


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 03:47:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul (none / 0)

Your candid answer is appreciated.  Thank you.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 11:00:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

My apologies - I head the article with commentary... then the article is simply incorrect - So what Danny Glover as sided with Edwards?  Morgan Freeman is close to Obama? And, we all knew that Hillary can Bill were close to prominent members of the AA community.  Who cares, we can pull famous black people's names out of a hat all day.

The fact is that this article, and I'm not sure why Mitchell wrote this way, doesn't accuretly demonstrate AA voting patterns... Hillary was/is a white women trying to show she cares about black women.  Obama is a black man who throughout the debate talked about issue specific things, with solutions, to adress the problems.  Hillary has a tendency (I think it is deliberate) to be asked a question and then spend the next minute rhetorically bemoaning the issue presented - it is really frustrating to watch.

I forgot to mention all the recent Fl/S.C./ and GA polls show Obama tracking up in the AA community - those are the states he has been campaigning in too.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

Well, if Obama had uttered Hillary's one-liner he'd have been labled an angry black man.

Moreover, Obama's critique was more on point concerning the real reasons that HIV rates are so high in our community.

Hillary: Cheap political points. Good for her, she's a politician.

Obama: A useful critique born of true concern for our community.


by bode78 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:52:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & (none / 0)

I have the same take on it like you, but I think that, if I were black, I'd be getting tired of the, "Nobody cares about you" reminder coming from a white woman.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 08:31:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & (3.00 / 1)

I do get tired of it . I also get tired of the fact that everyone seems to be interested in or an expert on the Black Community........when there's an election. Other than that, they remain silent on the issues that effect us.

That's the most annoying of all.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:31:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & (none / 0)

I agree.  I remember when Dean said we were going to have a conversation about race.  I'm still waiting.  I support Obama because I agree that what happens to me happens to you and vice versa.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 10:58:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

may i ask why clinton's level of support amongst the audience AFTER the debate


by True Independent on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 07:40:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

may (none / 0)

i meant to say why her level of support dropped after the debate


by True Independent on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 07:41:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 1)

Your predictions highly contradict the Clinton campaign's prediction.  They were expecting to be outfundraised by Obama.  Not to mention the fact, the numbers I was seeing as floating predictions for Obama were 30 million, and Clinton 27 million.  (Not counting primary vs ge money)


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:44:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

I had seen some info that suggested that the $27 Million was deliberately low-balled, that at the time the estimate was released, several indications became apparent that donations were much higher than initially pegged and asked-for by the so-called "Hillary-raisers," which (according to the insider article in the NY Times I linked to here) means that the haul of $27 Million seemed like a low-ball to understate real support.   I am personally thinking the official number will be at around $33 to $35 Million, but I am not sure how it divides in GE vs. primary numbers.     I guess we will see sometime this coming week.


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (3.00 / 0)

Regardless of the final number, it is inflated by Clinton's general election fundraising.  Obama will still beat Clinton handily in dollars raised for the primary.


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She will inflate her numbers (none / 0)

Watch and see..She will lump general money alongside the primary money...We know that she's pushing hard for general money while Edwards and Obama arent.

If she raises up to $33mil, i will guarantee you that at least $5 million of that is for general and her primary money will be around the 28-29 million


by JaeHood on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:38:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

Post above makes a good point.  Obama has outfundraised her by (supposedly) 15 million so far.  She got 10 million from her senate account and has GE cash to swim in.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:20:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul & memo (none / 0)

Perhaps.  When the numbers come out, we'll know more.  The $27 Million figure was circulated over 10 days ago, and there have been several high-profile fundraisers since then.  The NY Times article speculates that the take may be several Milions higher than that $27 Million figure suggested.   Of course, how much of that is being put away for the GE is another issue.  


by georgep on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:59:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

a (none / 0)

has to be put away for GE you mean.  Since she's collecting early to fluff her numbers.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:15:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You missed Wolfson's memo (3.00 / 0)

Wolfson posted on her website on 6/28 that the money would be "about what we did in the First Quarter, or slightly more, which should put us in the range of $27 million."

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/blog/view/ ?id=8969


by Doug Dilg on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:41:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Haul &amp (3.00 / 0)

actually the 27 million figure was floated 3 days after the indian-american fundraiser in chicago where she supposedly raised 2-3 million.


by rapcetera on Sun Jul 0