Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

BlackGriffen · Nov 26, 2003, 04:16 PM

Want to track the "money primary"? Head over to Fundrace.org. I especially like their maps.

Some interesting surprises. For instance, Mississippi leans Democratic?

Very interesting stuff to ponder.
I think it would be neat to normalize the contribution levels for population and for average income, giving a way to compare the leanings of different states more objectively.

Also, when comparing money graphs between individual candidates, be careful, the scales are all different, and they are all non-linear.

BlackGriffen

voyageur · Nov 26, 2003, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:

I think it would be neat to normalize the contribution levels for population and for average income, giving a way to compare the leanings of different states more objectively.

Yes, my thought too. Our county (and a few others, like LA County) show up as big givers to every candidate because it's a wealthy and populous county.

Fascinating site.

spacefreak · Nov 27, 2003, 10:55 PM

Very neat...good find. Too bad it doesn't take into consideration the millions and millions of dollars 'softly' contributed to political action organizations (like Soros giving $10+ million to moveon.org).

This is where the liberals have the conservative beat as of now - getting around the new campaign finance laws.

mcsjgs · Nov 29, 2003, 09:05 PM

If the Democrats have found clever ways to get around the campaign finance laws and are out fundraising the Republicans, I would be amazed.

I bet the Republicans will raise between 1.5 to 2 times the money the Democrats will when you look at all the Presidential, Congressional and Gubernatorial races in 04.

It's pretty lopsided from everything I've read, but I have not looked at the individual disclosure documents that are on file.

I wish the Democrats were such good fundraisers. It would even the playing field politically.

Zimphire · Nov 30, 2003, 02:01 PM

Actually there was a link posted in here not a year ago showing over the past 10 years or so, the Dems received more money than the Repubs over all.

mcsjgs · Nov 30, 2003, 02:02 PM

Not lately.

Zimphire · Nov 30, 2003, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by mcsjgs:
Not lately.

Really? got any FACTS with ALL the donations to prove this?

einmakom · Nov 30, 2003, 02:08 PM

http://www.opensecrets.org is a good place to begin.

mcsjgs · Nov 30, 2003, 02:16 PM

I'll sure dig around. The reason the numbers are skewed over the last 10 years is the success of Clinton/Gore fundraising in 92 and 96 races. Especially 96-98 period. No longer the case. That bulge has passed through the anaconda.

mcsjgs · Nov 30, 2003, 02:37 PM

One example from opensecrets.org (thank you for hint) is that Bush has raised $85 million by Oct. 15.

Bush is running unopposed. Bush has an avowed goal of rasing a warchest of up to $300 millon for '04 campaign. He regularly raises $3 million a pop at fundraisers. 100 fundraisers at $3 million gets his goal. He has got $85 million as of 10/15 and is not slowing down or spending much, so the chances are good that he will be able to raise his goal or close to it.

Howard Dean, the leading Democratic fundraiser, has raised $25 million plus by 10/15, but he will run in contested primaries all the way. Must raise more money for general election cycle.

Huge advantage for Bush. More examples to come as soon as I can find some of the orgs and reporting sites I want.

Zimphire · Nov 30, 2003, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by mcsjgs:
I'll sure dig around. The reason the numbers are skewed over the last 10 years is the success of Clinton/Gore fundraising in 92 and 96 races. Especially 96-98 period. No longer the case. That bulge has passed through the anaconda.

What, wait, are you saying the person the is the President at TIME of the election spends more money?

You are kidding me..

Wow, I would have never guessed.

In other words, nothing new. This isn't even worth making a topic over.

BlackGriffen · Nov 30, 2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by Zimphire:
What, wait, are you saying the person the is the President at TIME of the election spends more money?

You are kidding me..

Wow, I would have never guessed.

In other words, nothing new. This isn't even worth making a topic over.

Luckily, that wasn't the topic, though it could be considered part of the topic.

Quit trying to derail the thread.
BG

Zimphire · Dec 1, 2003, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:

Luckily, that wasn't the topic, though it could be considered part of the topic.

Quit trying to derail the thread.
BG

Derailing the thread? Give me a break.

villalobos · Dec 1, 2003, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by Zimphire:
[B]What, wait, are you saying the person the is the President at TIME of the election spends more money?

huh?

villa