MyDD :: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obama?

Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obama?

by Jonathan Singer, Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:05:31 PM EST

Help Sustain MyDD. Please Contribute Today

persicks touched on Barack Obama's fundraising earlier tonight, but I want to talk a little more about the topic, specifically about the possibility that he could follow up on his record-breaking fundraising haul from January with another $30 million month.

Barack Obama's campaign is on track to raise another $30 million in February, sources close to the Illinois senator say, while Hillary Rodham Clinton's spokesman revealed Wednesday that she had loaned her campaign $5 million.

Insiders in both campaigns say the growing financial disparity virtually ensures that Obama will be able to significantly outspend Clinton in the critical primaries to come.

When the Politico article above went to press about five hours ago, the campaign said that it had raised about $2.2 million over the preceding 24-hour period. Looking at a slightly metric, the Obama campaign has now raised north of $5.7 million -- and rising -- since polls closed last night. That's just a stunning number, both inherently (it's a lot of money) and in light of the fact that the campaign already squeezed more than $100 million out of supporters in 2007 and more than $32 million just in January.

Hillary Clinton was able to keep up last year with a flow of $2,300 checks, as well as a solid transfer from her Senate reelection campaign account. However, with a sizable majority of donors already maxed out (see Adam Bonin here, here, here and here), it's becoming increasingly (though nevertheless surprisingly) clear that relying predominantly on big dollar donors to go up against another campaign that enjoys the support of both big dollar donors and also hundreds of thousands of smaller dollar donors (don't think that that John Kerry endorsement didn't do anything) may force a candidate to turn not only to one $5 million loan but another potential subsequent loan as well.

Tags: Barack Obama, Fundraising (all tags)

Permalink :: 48 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 0)

Cash is over-rated at the Presidential level.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:09:49 PM EST

You can't tell me that his (2.00 / 1)

dollars didn't lead to him winning, and by huge margins, all those midwest states.

In Texas with 4 major media markets, Obama now has 60 staff on the ground. Hillary is going to be completely dependent on free media. It cost 15-20 million to run a good race in Texas

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:15:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Exactly (2.00 / 1)

Obama needs to outright win one of TX, OH, and PA. Not tossup win like MO -- but a solid 5+ points win, with a nice delegate spread.

PA is probably the least favorable.

So what can Obama do with OH and TX? Well... he can on the air in both big time. Saturate for a week -- then see where he can most move the needle.

Once the fertile ground is identified - he can park himself in that state... spend the whole last week of Feb in it... criss-cross the state, do 20K events all over.

he can afford to do that... HRC cannot afford to firewall both.

by zonk on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:26:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

US Census weighs in (2.00 / 1)

Whether there are enough AAs in Ohio, or PA, or TX for Obama to win I cannot say.

But you say Ohio is his best bet among the three because there are more AAs. According the most recent census the pct of AAs in those three is as follows

OH:12.0
TX: 11.9
PA: 10.7

What was your argument again?

"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC

by Trond Jacobsen on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Exactly (none / 0)

Texas primary voting demographics are nothing like California. We have tried everything and cannot get Latinos out to vote their percentages. The Texas Primary is traditionally a mix of liberal, chattering class, whites and Blacks.

AA's come out because a bunch of districts, especially in the texas house, have been drawn to be Black only - so the races are usually just primary races with no general Republican candidate.

If Obama just keeps his 35% Latino number he will win Texas

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:46:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

2004 TX primary numbers (none / 0)

In the last, essentially non-event Texas primary, the Latino percentage of the electorate was 24% - three points greater than the percentage of African-American voters. Now, that is a skew in favor of black voters over Hispanics in comparison to their numbers in the population at large but it hardly supports the notion that Latinos don't vote in Texas primaries. In fact, they were a smaller percentage of the California primary electorate last time. Plus, this will be TX's first contested presidential primary in sixteen years - you have to assume turnout will be way up with everybody, but especially Hispanics, the fastest-growing group in the state.

Politically and demographically, I'd say that the Texas Democratic voting mix is similar to a state like Tennessee - urban & collegetown liberals (favors Obama), blacks (favors Obama), rural and working-class yellow-dogs (favors Hillary), older voters (favors Hillary) - but with a California-size Hispanic population that seems to overwhelmingly support Clinton. Factoring in the ongoing underpolling of Hispanics, I'd say the state is baseline 54/40 Clinton.

by Shawn on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:43:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Texas is a mixed caucus-primary (none / 0)

You can vote in the caucus only after voting in the primary. 2/3 of delegates are selected in the caucus. It's going to take a lot of organization and education to get voters to do what they need. Hillary has shown no ability to organize for caucuses, with the exception of Nevada (or Las Vegas, to be precise). Hillary could win the 1/3 of votes in the primary stage but lose in the caucus phase and come out behind in Texas. Keep this weirdness in mind when looking at Texas.

by elrod on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:57:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Exactly (none / 0)

WE BARACKED IOWA!

by danIA on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:05:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Objectivity is lacking at the pundit level (2.00 / 1)

1) Ground game is very important and very expensive. The more field organizers the better. This is how Obama won over the folks in Iowa, and I think is what will give him a shot in Ohio and Texas.

2) Ask John Edwards if money matters. Another $50 million might have made a big difference.

3) money + media = momentum = more money + more media = more momentum.

4) Money problems cut down the "dirty trick" options for the Clintons, who have clearly shown that they will try whatever they think they can get away with their backs are to the wall.

by upper left on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:39:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 1)

Sure. Ask Mike Huckabee about the importance of cash.

So, why'd Hillary need a loan?

by Adam B on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:06:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

I think Jerome is right in that big wealth is a bit overrated (e.g. Ron Paul). However, broke is broke, and if she's going broke then she's going back to the Senate.

by JoeFelice on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:45:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sometimes the news reports the (none / 0)

truth

Bring Back MyDD - Just say No to Rec'ing Candidate Diaries.

by CardBoard on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:10:42 PM EST

Re: Sometimes the news reports the (2.00 / 0)

You didn't realize there was a problem when Bush was first elected?

by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:19:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let me get this straight (2.00 / 1)

We've complained for the past 30 years that the media is engaged in some vast right wing conspiracy, and yet when they find a very liberal, progressive Democrat they love, you complain?

Wonderful.

Bryan Barash is the Internet Communications Manager for the Tom Udall for Senate campaign.

by turnnoblindeye on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sometimes the news reports the (2.00 / 1)

Didn't hear any complaints when they were anointing Hillary the nominee early on and saying Barack wasn't black enough, was to soft, wasn't willing to take on the opposition, etc, etc.

The media are sheep once they pick up a storyline they all parrot each other. Sometimes it works for you, sometimes against. Manipulating the media and keeping control of the narrative is part of the game. Obama has had a good run since SC but that could change in a minute.

by hankg on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:41:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month (2.00 / 1)

Well, he got another $50 from me.

by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:11:26 PM EST

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month (none / 0)

and from me

by mbcarl on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 03:35:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 1)

I don't have alot to give but i gave my 15th or so contribution of $25 or less today.

What would LBJ do?

by Socks The Cat on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:13:49 PM EST

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 4)

Or adopt a Clinton staffer. For just $1.00 a day, you can give them shelter and nourishment that they would otherwise go without. I kid, I kid. :)

by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:18:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

Heh. That's pretty good, too.

by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:26:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

Actually, according to Josh Marshall, Obama finally can afford to pay Mark Penn.

by ChrisR on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:41:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

Where i come from they call that gallows humor.

by cswartout on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:44:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

Or smoke a bowl with Bill and Hill. Now was Bill a drug dealer?

by illlaw1 on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:25:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Disagree (none / 0)

I am finding that many of Clinton's donors were not aware of needing to donate more. Why? Who knows but I think you will start to see a change in her numbers.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/6/20142 /31513

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:16:04 PM EST

Re: Disagree (2.00 / 1)

Unfortunately, a lot of Clinton's donors have already donated the maximum amount allowable. They already knew to give more, but can't donate any further outside of the whole bundling thing.

By contrast, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has relied more on a smaller pool of big-money donors, many of whom have already given the maximum allowable under the law.

Vote Who Sane '08!

by nafamabo on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:24:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

New donors (none / 0)

and try this...

http://opensecrets.org

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:28:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What makes (none / 0)

so many people think that the vast majority of Clinton supporters have maxed out? If that was the case, then she would be far ahaed of Obama in terms of money raised.

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:30:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

read the links (none / 0)

50% of her money is from maxed-out donors, compared to 33% for Obama.

by Adam B on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:08:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and (none / 0)

... so that means of people that HAVE donated already. Do you really think she isn't getting any new donors?

Also, there are going to be donors on BOTH sides that will NEVER max out because they can't. I am one of those type of donors.

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:22:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and (none / 0)

Tell me who the people are who haven't given her campaign a dime yet who are going to max out all of a sudden.

Yes, she'll get new donors, but the key is taking existing small-dollar donors and leveraging that support into more and higher amounts.

by Adam B on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:24:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Disagree (2.00 / 1)

I'm not sure about that. Why should I feel an urge to give her cash when she can just peel off a 5 million dollar bill? So I can help her pay off the "loan"? Give me a break. I wouldn't give her a nickel, she doesn't need it.

by Chili Dogg on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what a dork (none / 0)

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:22:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama (2.00 / 1)

I've got a lot of reasons for supporting Obama, and won't piss off the Hillaryites any further by reciting them all, but...

The Democratic Party needs to understand that a candidate like Obama doesn't come along every day. Brilliant orator, mixed race, attractive personality, great biography, ability to inspire previously disenfranchised voters to the polls, great crossover appeal to Indes and Republicans, and tremendous fundraising capabilities.

Hillary has none of that. Zero, zilch. She is a garden variety centrist Democrat, and we have a million of those already. It doesn't matter if we agree with Obama on every tedious detail of health care policy. The guy is a rare and extraordinary political miracle, and if we as a Party fail to recognize his gifts and maximize their value, then we deserve to keep suffering under GOP rule. Let's get him elected, along with a tidal wave of Congressional seats, and then we will be in a favorable position to advance a progressive agenda.

by global yokel on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:25:51 PM EST

Re: Obama (none / 0)

roger that

by Chili Dogg on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:33:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama (none / 0)

I think your post is a good Rorschach test for voters.

I read your description of him, and even if I were to agree with all of it (the "rare and extraordinary political miracle" is a little over the top, I think), I still would want to know what his policies are. And I don't think that the difference between universal and non-universal health care is a detail.

But obviously a lot of people think differently. To each his or her own.

by OrangeFur on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:17:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama IS (none / 0)

a GREAT speaker! He inspires like crazy!

But... that does not mean he can govern like that.

I hate that he talks of "the party" and "our party" insteand of the Democratic party. Is he now the Obama party?

cult of personality.

The cries I hear and see from many supporters of all candidates when they drop out is... THIRD PARTY... INDEPENDANT... We can do it.

If Obama loses, the cries like this will be HUGE.

ugh.

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:26:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 1)

This looks pretty decisive to me, not just because of the amount raised but because the Obama campaign has shown that they know how to use the money pretty well.

I really do think that it should occasion some soul searching about the meaning and future significance of this new people-powered fundraising model. There is a tendency in the blogosphere to view this fundraising phenomenon as an unalloyed good - the triumph of the little guy over traditional interests. I think its a bit more complex. To me the amazing Obama numbers also suggest the disparities between broad electoral coalitions which, in aggregate, differ in their financial means.

Obama's supporters are energized and passionate and his campaign should be credited for its fundraising innovations. But let's call a spade a spade. The median household income in America is about 35K, our net savings rate is negative, and the country is heading into a recession. For most Americans, dropping a few hundred dollars on a political contribution actually means something right now. So to pull off fundraising like this, you need a coalition that is not really a cross-section of America, but is weighted towards people with higher incomes and better earning potential. If this kind of fundraising model becomes more dominant in the future, as seems likely, it is going to provide net benefits to candidates with similar coalitions. I'm not sure that's particularly egalitarian. The triumph of the little guy, seen in another perspective, may also be the triumph of the upper middle class over the working class.

by FuzzyDunlop2 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:29:45 PM EST

UPDATE on Hillary (none / 0)

BREAKING! Hillary to Announce Huge Fundraising Day
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/6/2 3290/73380/940/451643

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:39:10 PM EST

Re: UPDATE on Hillary (2.00 / 2)

No offense, but if you are linking to a Kos diary and Taylor Marsh and the only source is an "unverified excerpt of Clinton's email" then you have no source.

Please do not misconstrue this as Hillary bashing. I am not saying that she is incapable of raising $3 million in a day, but if that is your proof then it is no proof.

I'm no journalist, but that is not fit to print yet.

by cswartout on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:53:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising (none / 0)

For administration: is this size okay?

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:46:01 PM EST

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (2.00 / 0)

6 Million

Just went over 6 before 12:00 EST.

by Piuma on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 11:59:34 PM EST

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

6.1 at 12:15. He getting like 100K per 15 minutes about. I wonder how long this will keep up.

Can't wait to check it out tomorrow.

John McCain defends Bush's Iraq strategy.

by recusancy on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:19:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for Obam (none / 0)

Everyone knows Obama will have more money. All we Hillary folks want is enough to buy uniforms and field a team.

If you have a team you have a chance.

by OrangeFur on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:20:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $30 Millio (none / 0)

Obama's website says he's raised over $6 million since yesterday. Astonishing. http://my.barackobama.com/page/contribut e_c/sincefeb5_email/graphic

by mecarr on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 12:39:36 AM EST

$6.2 million and counting (none / 0)

These numbers are stunning. What's great is that they know what to do with this money. They won't waste it on blimps and cowbells. They'll organize to dominate the Maine, Nebraska and Washington caucuses. They'll organize to master the bizarre Texas combined caucus-primary. They'll fan out organizers all across New Orleans, Wisconsin and even Hawaii. And they'll spend a ton of money on advertising in DC, Richmond and Norfolk. They'll set up organizers throughout southern Virginia, Baltimore, northern Virginia, DC, suburban Maryland and Tidewater. They'll spend lots of money for advertising in Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland, and organize all throughout the state to compete with Ted Strickland and Rep. Tubbs-Jones. They'll do a lot with all that money.

by elrod on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:05:12 AM EST

Re: Another $30 Million Fundraising Month for O (none / 0)

and from me

by mbcarl on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 03:35:42 AM EST

Fundraising has Peaks and Valleys (none / 0)

While I agree that Obama will outfundraise Clinton significantly this month, you should be careful to extrapolate numbers based on a small sampling.

You can see the large fluctations of money fund raising on http://RonPaulGraphs.com.

In particular, if you look at
http://ronpaulgraphs.com/daily_totals.ht ml
you should be aware that the scale is LOGRITHMIC not linear. Because some days they raised 6 million and some days much less (e.g. they only raised $21,000 four days before their $1.8 million on Martin Luther King day).

While Ron Paul's campaign promotes specific peak days, the effect of these promotions (there is at least one per week) is quite varied. Plus you can consider the day after a successful primary as a promotion day so I'm sure Obama's fundraising in January shows these kinds of peaks and valleys too (and they do have occasional campaign promotions).

One last note, while it's clear Obama will far out fundraise anyone else Obama still hasn't raised as much on a single day as Ron Paul has, so give the Paulites their due too.

And it would be nice to see Obama more clearly ACT on his words about openness, but simply publishing live numbers every minute, every day, like Ron Paul has been doing for 4 months, instead of only during brief, POLITICALLY TACTICAL periods that Obama has been doing.

by TheWinch on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 09:16:51 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.