Patterico's Pontifications


Did The Obama Campaign Sense Trouble in Its Announcement of July Fundraising Totals? Updated

Filed under: General — WLS @ 6:11 pm

[Posted By WLS]

Bracketed by the end of Obama’s Pleasant Hawaiian Holiday on Friday and the Showdown at Saddleback on Saturday night, the Obama campaign quietly announced Saturday morning that it had raised $51 million in July, and had cash on hand totaling $68 million. That seems like they were expecting it to be treated as bad news by the press– which it is – and were hoping that it would quickly drop off the radar screen with the coverage of Saddleback – which it did.  If they thought his fundraising was a blowout story, they would have played it up and gotten some positive press.

You can see that they think it was bad news by the fact that they led off the press release with a comment about the number of new donors – 65,000 – rather than the fundraising numbers themselves. The new donors total is a non-issue – anyone could have anticipated that a large number of former Clinton supporters would gravitate to the Obama camp in June and July.


If my memory is correct, the campaign previously announced that it had raised $52 million in June, and had $72 million cash on hand. Now math has always been hard, but the college engineering professor who gave me a C- would probably agree that Obama’s campaign spent $4 million more than he raised in July, meaning that his monthly burn rate right now is about $55 million – and that was in a month when he spent 9 days in Europe and the Middle East, a big chunk of which was paid for by taxpayer dollars (appropriately). Lets call his burn rate right now about $2 million a day.

McCain raised $27 million in July, and has $21 million to spend at the beginning of the month. The difference is that McCain must spend all his remaining money before the GOP convention, after which he will receive $84 million from the FEC.

The RNC raised $26 million in July, and has $75 million on hand to start August. But with McCain needing to burn through his cash, the RNC can sit quiet and save its money for the stretch run. So its possible with August fundraising the RNC could be sitting on a cash pile of better than $100 million after the convention. Combined with McCain’s taxpayer funds, the GOP candidate will have about $185 million for the 10 weeks from the convention to election day.  

If Obama burns through $60 million in August (at $2 million a day, including convention costs), he’ll have only $8 million left from the money he started the August with. He’s already spent a week in Hawaii this month, directly raising only about $3 million in two events he held there. If he raises $50 million again for the month – not a certainty with falling poll numbers, declining fundraising, and doubts beginning to be expressed about his readiness for the job – he’ll have only $58 million in his own money on Sept. 1.

The DNC began August with $28 million, after raising $27 million during the month.  If the DNC raises another $30 million in August, it might have $50 million left after the convention. So Obama and the DNC start off the general election campaign after Labor Day with a combined total of $108 million — or about $80 million less than McCain and the GOP.

Obama can continue raising money, while McCain can’t (though the RNC can).  But Obama’s attendance at fundraisers – including ones like George Clooney is hosting in Switzerland – takes Obama off the campaign trail. Fundraising takes place at parties and dinners with a few hundred check-writers, and not at campaign events where thousands or potential voters show up. There’s a reason why candidates don’t want to raise money in the 10 weeks of the general election campaign, and the Obama camp is starting to see it.

Remember that when Obama announced this fundraising gambit in early June, some of his supporters projected that he might raise as much as $250-300 million after he became the presumptive nominee. In the first 60 of the 150 days (2/5’s for those challenged by large numbers) between becoming the presumptive nominee and election day, he has raised $103 million. So the $300 million number seems out of the question – he would need to increase his fundraising pace by better than 40% to raise another $200 million from Aug 1 to Oct. 31. Since fundraising will begin to start competing with campaigning after September 1, the lower end of the range is probably also no longer realistic either — he would have to maintain the same fundraising pace he is on now.  If the new realistic total is $220 million, then he’ll raise only another $120 million between Aug 1 and Oct. 31. That would give him a total of $188 million to spend between Aug 1 and Oct 31 (he began Aug. with $68 million). But if he is burning $2 million a day, he needs $180 million just to break even over that same period. And that amount would not allow for increases above current spending levels as election day draws nearer.

We know Obama has built a huge campaign staff in anticipation of running a 50 state strategy – and has paid campaign staffers in no-win states like Utah and Texas. I expect those plans are under serious review. That strategy has kept his advertising limited in places like Nevada and Colorado, where his early leads have become current polling deficits. I was in the Reno area last week, and it is being bombarded with ads from both candidates – but McCain is easily running twice as many ads as Obama, both on radio and TV. I thought it was curious that Obama’s first post-Saddleback appearance was in Reno – and although it was proclaimed publicly to be a “townhall” event, in actuality it was invitation-only and the invitations went out to union leaders and labor activists. That’s a strange call unless your support in the state is slipping and you’re really trying to rally the troops who feel the race beginning to slip away.

When Obama begins to alter his spending habits, and paid staff are eliminated in places like Texas, and ads quit running in places like Indiana and North Carolina, the press is going to notice that Obama’s 50 state strategy is no more.  The questions will then begin about whether Obama’s decision to opt out of public financing was wise or foolish.  I think the GOP money guys are laughing right about now as Obama and his camp continue chasing dollars as much as voters.

Update:  Interesting local TV News story out of Denver yesterday about prime up-front tickets to Obama’s Invesco Field speech being sold by the Obama campaign for $1000 a pop, even though the campaign has trumpeted the fact that attendance is free for those given tickets.  Could the fund-raising opportunity be the real reason the speech was moved to Invesco?   Given my complete inability to successfully embed a video, I’m dubious about whether this works, but here it is.

<object width=”425″ height=”344″><param name=”movie” value=”″></param><param name=”wmode” value=”transparent”></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><embed src=”” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true” wmode=”transparent” width=”425″ height=”344″></embed></object>

If that doesn’t work maybe DRJ can fix it, or you can look for it over at the  weeklystandard blog.

An interesting point brough up by the piece is that the ability to purchase these special tickets is restricted to big donors who are solicited and given a special address on the Obama website.  A general member of the public cannot get to the website page to make the purchase.   As the reporter notes, once she started making inquiries on the topic, the special page was shut down, and now says that tickets are no longer available.

60 Responses to “Did The Obama Campaign Sense Trouble in Its Announcement of July Fundraising Totals? Updated”

  1. That’s a nice job, WLS. My compliments. It would be interesting to see the numbers in tabular form but I don’t know if this software supports that.

    I believe that the drop off in donations is a reflection of those poll results that DRJ highlights in the post below. Axelrod is on the same fundraising path that Trippi laid for Dean in ’04. They have hit the plateaue and it isn’t going to get any better. In fact, it will get a lot worse as more and more ObamaJugend become disillusioned and take off their Greenshirts for the last time. That will leave the core of ACORN/SEIU SturmAbteilung and they don’t raise money – they spend money to whip votes.

    Why should a progs campaign be any more efficient than any other organization in any prog fief? Just think of the Obama campaign as a Chicago school during the time when Obama was collaborating with a domestic terrorist to throw away Annenberg’s money. Nothing improved – except for the lifestyles of Alinsky acolytes.

    Rick Ballard (0a8990)

  2. Fundraising in Switzerland? I thought there were laws forbidding foreign campaign contributions.

    Dagny Taggart (da87ed)

  3. That event with Clooney is not going to go over well with independents already wondering about Obama’s elitist tendencies, coupled with the McCain’s campaign’s continued harping on his celebrity status. It’s way too easy to run against the Hollywood crowd these days – the Messiah’s showing true feet of clay.

    Dmac (874677)

  4. Great article. (I know less math than you, but it sounds reasonable.) Obama’s strategy of eschewing public funds only works if his numbers are rising. His fundraising numbers chase his poll numbers, now slipping downward. And then vice versa.

    I think there’s a chance he’ll take Hillary as VP now. He’s about to hit an unstoppable spiral O/W.

    Patricia (f56a97)

  5. Obama can pick any manner of fundraising he wants, opt in or opt out of federal dollars – unless he can make it translate into actual poll numbers, it’s not going to do him much good and he seems to have some trouble doing that.

    Over the past couple months he’s had the largest advantage he’ll have in this campaign (from this point on, the McCain camp starts to ratchet it up) – and it’s gotten him what?

    Anon (db8e0c)

  6. I expect the Clooney event to be cancelled or for Obama to decide against attending. Its being held in Switzerland, but it is only for ex-pats who can legally contribute. The McCain campaign would have a field day with the images it could conjur up from having a bunch of ex-pat Euros wannabees like Madonna, Gwynneth Paltrow, Johnny Depp, Clooney, etc., piling up wads of cash in front of Obama.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  7. WLS – You ought to include the in-kind contributions from the MSM.

    Hope your vacation was great.

    JD (5f0e11)

  8. I hope your vacation was great, too, but I’m glad you’re back. I missed posts like this.

    DRJ (a5243f)

  9. All the fundraising is secondary as the debates will determine the election. The Obama people are very worried after the Saddleback event and we are seeing increasingly nasty attacks on McCain. I say bring it on as these will rebound on the source. McCain needs to keep his cool and do as well in the first debate as he did this weekend. If he does, Obama will implode.

    MIke K (2cf494)

  10. WLS,

    I think you’re quite right about him not returning to Europe. The depth of the man’s true ignorance is revealed by the fact that he headed for Europe while Joe Sixpack’s face was getting redder and redder every time he hit the gas pump. The jerk then compounded his error by jetting off to Hawaii – ole Joe’s still sitting in front of that gas pump getting madder.

    The elitest jerks can scream racist to the rafters but the fact is that Obama is just one more in a line of liberals going back to Stevenson in ’52 who have no clue as to how to connect with the working man. Kennedy wasn’t a liberal, Johnson did know how to connect, as did Carter to some extent and Bubba to a much greater extent. He will lose because he has beclowned himself, no matter what the progs scream.

    Rick Ballard (0a8990)

  11. I spent my entire “vacation” replacing about 120 feet of cedar fencing, refurbishing a backyard deck, and tending to “BMPs” (best management practices) imposed by that quasi-Nazi outfit, the Tahoe Regional Planning Authority. I couldn’t wait to get back to work so I could relax.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  12. Rick – Beclowning is better than beshitting.

    I thought McCain missed a golden opportunity when Baracky was in Europe. I was hoping for commercials that said “while Baracky is out trying to increase his popularity in Germany and France, I, The Maverick, care more about the people of Scranton, Youngstown, and Des Moines”

    JD (5f0e11)

  13. WLS – The regional planning authority caanot be any more difficult than the Architectural Review Board of my HOA. We are replacing part of our roof, putting in copper on the dormers, as well as copper gutters, and they informed us today that the copper is too shiny, and we need to use a copper with a patina already on it. Fuckin’ racists, they are.

    JD (5f0e11)

  14. #4 – Patricia

    I think there’s a chance he’ll take Hillary as VP now

    — Obama, paraphrasing from McCain: “I would rather lose an election than have that bitch on my ticket and her husband on my ass.”

    Icy Truth (bec4ce)

  15. I think Obama would like to have Hillary on his ticket, if only because she can raise a ton of money while he campaigns, but the problem is that Hillary doesn’t seem to want the position.

    She wasn’t bashful when she did. She came right out and said it. And VP hopefuls try to get on talk-shows and make some noise. I don’t think she wants Obama to win, and I think she doesn’t want to be attached to his failure. She won the popular vote for the nomination, and the delegate roll call will get her a lot of attention, though I imagine she will pull some unity stunt by giving all her delegates to Obama. That will keep her the front-runner after a bruising campaign.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  16. And tonight I actually heard a reporter for NewsWeak say that McCain had “outspent” Obama and that led to Obama’s drop in the polls.

    Typical Beltway math.

    Neo (cba5df)

  17. According to Larry C. Johnson the Democrats money problems may be a little deeper than is laid out here 🙂

    chad (1d48f6)

  18. Chad, Larry Johnson is less credible than nearly anyone else on the internet. I trust youtube comments about UFOs more than I trust that guy.

    Though his general point, that Obama’s fundraising will suck some money from his party’s other tickets and such, is certainly true.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  19. Look at all the comment spam. It’s clearly intended to disable to site. Spammers don’t like to oversaturate with spam that forces folks not to read.

    Whatever system is being used to keep this site stable, it seemed to be doing an excellent job.

    Obama supporters: this is what is happening across the right blogosphere. Left wingers are breaking the law in order to silence their political rivals. It is disgusting, and it is common. You guys make up vicious smears about Mccain, steal votes, slam library doors to researchers you don’t agree with, and use technology to destroy dissenting views. Ultimately, these actions will galvanize support for “conservatives.”

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  20. Juan, don’t attribute to malice what is explicable by plain old fashioned greed.

    The comment spam you’re seeing is generated by “robots” that tirelessly troll the web looking for vulnerable spots to lay their eggs, rather like something out of Alien XIV.

    Since Patterico is using WordPress, I would suggest investigating the Comment Timeout plugin, which turns off commenting on old threads after a determinable amount of time.

    EW1(SG) (873090)

  21. EW1, this pattern on right leaning blogs that are discussing Obama has become specially pronounced this week, and the spam is not greedy in any conceivable sense. Not only are the spams far too frequent to have a likelihood of being read (I’m sure you’ve seen the real greed spam that hides among solid posts), but they are also unreadable and do not legitimately suggest something to purchase. Yeah, a lot of them say “Buy X” But they are too general and random… for example “Buy Cameras” (actual quote). That’s not an attempt to increase sales, that is a pathetic attempt to hide fascism. The contents of the messages are things like “ezurb”. Not really all that compelling a sales pitch. It’s meant to make these threads very time consuming to read.

    No, this is an attack. I guess there is some possibility that it’s not an attempt to damage the webpage. But this kind of thing is well known to not be an effective technique to increase google pagerank, and most of the links go to different sites (none of which lead to a purchasable product… many of which lead to blank pages).

    Not to be rude to you or anything. You’re wise to not throw around accusations, but I’m sick and tired of this happening repeatedly to blogs I frequent.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  22. but I’m sick and tired of this happening repeatedly to blogs I frequent.

    Maybe it is just you, Juan. Ever think of that? 😉

    JD (75f5c3)

  23. Oh I know Larry is less than reliable that is why I tagged the smiley face at the end, but what I should have said is something like If his interpretation can be trusted or something.

    chad (1d48f6)

  24. WLS – good, insightful work…

    I think that “Joe Sixpack” is starting to see Obama for what he is – a bonafide socialist, elitist,a “stuffed shirt” that cannot talk to an audience in a setting that is not “controlled” by his handlers. And, with Bill and Hill out on the trail doing their doublespeak (“We support him, but we need our voice heard at the convention”), he does not have it easy for the next 10 weeks.

    His “game” may play well in IL, but this is The Show – and McCain is old school. The young man was taken out to the woodshed on Saturday night at Saddleback, and it will happen again if Obama or any of his “friends” try playing games with the election.

    fmfnavydoc (cb936d)

  25. 24. And Obama’s sycophants recognize and are intimidated by McCain’s old school advantage so they just denigrate him as “old.”

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  26. Prejudice against older Americans is wrong and anyone who openly promotes this vile prejudice ought to be exposed. BTW, I thought age discrimination was against the law.

    On the other hand, McCain is old. But that’s only one of his advantages

    Ropelight (4a83c9)

  27. McCain is old? Who knew?!

    Let me get this straight: The Democrat Party continually (a) reminds me that Bambi is black and (b) McCain is old.

    Which is the party of prejudices again?

    steve miller (b589d7)

  28. Oh it’s perfectly fine to dredge the bottom for all of the low blows that you claim your opponents use, i.e. race, age. It’s all part of the edgy, nuanced, and complex manner by which the new progressive age will be birthed. I love the total lack of awareness of how advances in medicine, healthcare, and nutrition fostered by a free, capitalist society have enabled seniors to live healthy lives full of rigor and enjoyment. My spry 78 year old still running and biking dad could run circles around any young, lazy, pseudo-hip postmodern crybaby of today’s youth.

    Jack Klompus (cf3660)

  29. EW1:

    I think Juan is correct. This is something more than what you describe. Check out Amy Alkon, whose comments are being spammed from European servers with pages long nonsense characters:

    Apparently she expressed an opinion unacceptable to the readers of something called Sadlyno!, and this is retaliation.

    brobin (c07c20)

  30. Guys, guys, you get a completely different picture when you look at polls state by state.

    You guys are conveniently putting your hopes on a national poll (1000 people per day across the country).

    Sorry, but if McCain doesn’t pull the national poll up to about 10 points in his favor, you could be looking at a landslide.

    Oiram (983921)

  31. Oiram’s wicked math skillz apparently follow these lines of logic:

    1 + 1 = Eleventy
    2 + 1 = Twenty Gazillion Rubles
    Electoral College = Huh?

    It’s called the Electoral College, Oiram – please read up on this interesting little quirk held over from our nation’s founding, and get back to us with another scintillating analysis.

    Dmac (874677)

  32. WLS, I am late to this thread and don’t meant to take it in a slightly different direction (though this does pertain to the main thrust of your post), but why do you think that it is “appropriate” for taxpayers to foot the bill for Obama’s European/Middle East tour. Normally I would agree with you on this, but I am starting to think that Obama’s decision to opt out of campaign financing ought to have forced him to pick up the tab for the overseas journey himself. What are your thoughts about this?

    JVW (d54fc4)

  33. “30. Guys, guys, you get a completely different picture when you look at polls state by state.”

    Oriam, go to and look at the latest poll numbers by state. It still has you guys somewhat ahead (though only when you take out close states- we’re ahead if you don’t), but that difference has been diminishing rapidly.

    Anon (5e0805)

  34. “30. Guys, guys, you get a completely different picture when you look at polls state by state.”

    Oriam, go to and look at the latest poll numbers by state. It still has you guys somewhat ahead (though only when you take out close states- we’re ahead if you don’t), but that difference has been diminishing rapidly.

    Anon (5e0805)

  35. Sorry about the double post

    Anon (5e0805)

  36. JVW at 33 — I said “appropriately” because the trip to Afghanistan and Iraq was taken with two other US Senators, and by any measure applicable to other members of Congress, it was an official delegation.

    We can debate the relative merits of these types of congressional “fact-finding” trips, but that’s a different question. I was simply stating that part of Obama’s travels in July did not result in a drain on his campaign funds, though his campaign for President was clearly the intended beneficiary. But since it was an official delegation, and he was not the only Senator on the trip, it was appropriate under generally accepted standards that that portion of his trip not be expensed to the campaign.

    But his campaign will not enjoy 5 “expense free” days any time over the next 81 days.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  37. I’m sorry but raising $51 million dollars ina single month, twice as much as McCain, is not a sign of trouble. If anyone is in trouble it’s the man who hasn’t been raising enough money for months on end. Obama has shattered record after record. He will continue to do so. The totals raised by Obama and the DNC after the convention will be staggering.

    Not to mention that $51 million dollar total represents mostly many millions of small contributions by regular people, not huge political contributors. Which makes the accomplishment even more worthy.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  38. BTW welcome back WLS.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  39. Theoretically, Indiana should be one of the last places he pulls money from. (There’s a ton of Chicago spillover in Northern IN that at least has potential to turn the state blue.) But that said, Obama’s in a bigger money crunch than most folks realize.

    The real losers in all this are the down-ballot Senate and House races. The money that WOULD be going to those candidates are going to be sucked up by “The One”. If news anchors express incredulity as to how Republicans pick up seats (or lose less than expected) come November, you’ll know why.

    SaveFarris (04a081)

  40. Indiana was carried by Bush in 2004 by nearly 500,000 votes out of 2.5 million cast — that is 60-40.

    In 2000, Bush beat Gore by 350,000 votes out of 2.15 million cast — that is 59-41.

    No way Obama turns that state around as liberal as he is going to be made out to be over the next 81 days. He needs to simply pull out now and focus on states he could win like Colorado, New Hampshire, and Iowa.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  41. “If anyone is in trouble it’s the man who hasn’t been raising enough money for months on end.”

    OK, but then how do you explain that despite his huge advantages in money, personnel, organization and 24/7 media coverage, the Messiah’s still roughly break – even with McCain at this point? Now tell me again – who’s in trouble here? Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for The One.

    Dmac (874677)

  42. WLS – Baracky has been advertising in Indiana since he lost the primary to Hillary. If he could not beat Hillary amongst the Dems, there is not an ice cube’s chance in hell that he will beat a Republican, even if he picks Bayh.

    JD (5f0e11)

  43. Peter — its a sign of trouble when you compare what he is raising against what he NEEDS to raise. He’s not even close.

    What he needs to raise is a function of the campaign apparatus he has built — that beast must be fed or it must be slayed and replaced by something leaner.

    He isn’t raising enough money to feed it, and there is nothing going forward that would suggest that he will be able to.

    The obvious answer is to simply adopt a more traditional approach in trying to win — find the most likely sources for 271 electoral votes and concentrate resources there.

    The campaign is setting itself up to be second guessed for weeks on end if it continues to try and play in places where Obama has no shot of winning. It’s a rookie mistake.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  44. WLS,

    I agree. If Obama has made a mistake, it was his decision to go with a 50-state strategy, which may have occurred because they believed their own hype and thought Obama could win a landslide. Then Obama had to opt out of federal funding because $85M won’t pay the bills from the convention to November. It also caused Obama to backtrack on his promise to take federal funding and that showed he’s not new and different after all. And that tied him to endless, tiring fundraising. No wonder Obama has a cold.

    It would be ironic if Obama was lured into a 50-state strategy by hubris because it’s the same mistake Obama watched Hillary make in the primary. As Obama demonstrated in the primaries, candidates win elections by demonstrating strength and letting that strength carry over into other states or venues. And yet Obama in the general election seems to think the way to win is to act invincible (“I will win”) and run in all 50 states.

    DRJ (a5243f)

  45. WLS,

    There is a pretty heavy forfeiture penalty involved in cancellation of “early” buys and Obama’s campaign bought a lot of their time early. I believe (but I am not positive) that Obama’s placement people are (as Trippi was) “paid” through media placement. If that’s true, there will be foot dragging wrt cancellation. Trippi set the Gold Standard for screwing the nickle and dime givers (those of whom PT Barnum said “There’s one born every minute.”) and Dean was the brilliant one who insisted on the ‘fifty state’ schtick.

    Obama’s ‘concern’ for those being fleeced is evidenced by his ‘free’ event at the Reichshalle stadium in Denver where, for $1,000, you can be just a little more equal than the plebes who had to “volunteer” their time to get into a drawing.

    Rick Ballard (0a8990)

  46. The moment Obama appeared together with McCain on stage, the game was over. The country finally saw for the first time that choosing a president is actually a very serious thing. It’s not the MTV movie awards where the bigger celebrity is voted as the winner. They saw that McCain was and will be a better president than an unsure, confused and indecisive whiner.

    icen von (2ef5e2)

  47. It is indeed a rookie mistake, WLS, but that’s no surprise. When has Obama actually won a real electoral contest? All his wins have been with playing the machine or dirty tactics to keep himself out of “fair” election contests.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  48. #44 WLS

    I see your point about the money going out, and it is not a bad one, but remember, that network is also a money raising apparatus that can and will be put into action and every dollar put into toss up or red states, is a dollar sucked out of McCain campaign and the RNC fund for Congress so the fifty state strategy is smart because it puts the RNC on the ropes.

    BTW, I think many Obama’s supporters are keeping their powder dry for the show of strength at the convention, and for all that will follow in the run up to election day. Even with that, the guy is still raking in over $50 million a month. In the dead of Summer.

    This is all going to be a whole new ballgame after the convention. It’s all conjecture right now.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  49. I’m sorry but raising $51 million dollars ina single month, twice as much as McCain, is not a sign of trouble.

    That guy who only raised half as much is about to get federal matching funds – and, again, for all the tens of millions of dollars Obama has spent, what does he have to show for it?

    If the next hundred million obtains as much for him as the last hundred million, what good is all this?

    Anon (db8e0c)

  50. #48

    It is indeed a rookie mistake, WLS, but that’s no surprise. When has Obama actually won a real electoral contest? All his wins have been with playing the machine or dirty tactics to keep himself out of “fair” election contests.

    Originally I read that and was going to jump out the window at the sheer looniness of it, but on second thouoght, I have a better idea:

    Prove that statement or back it up with anything that approaches reality or sanity, or barring either of those things, a valid source.

    Of course if it’s just wishful thinking or a troll just say so, and then will all have a good laugh and move on…

    Peter (e70d1c)

  51. Peter – I put up the last post before your most recent one appeared.

    As far as dollars being sucked away from McCain, not necessarily –

    My answer would be McCain’s spending much less to match Obama, but even that’s not fully accurate:

    Liz Sidoti of the Associated Press runs down the 7 longtime Republican states that Barack Obama is targeting this election: Alaska, Georgia, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Virginia…

    Here are the results as of Aug. 4:

    RCP Average: Obama +1.0
    Last voted Democrat: 1964
    Amount Obama has spent on ads*: $2,660,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $1,509,000

    RCP Average:Obama +0.5
    Last voted Democrat: 1964
    Amount Obama has spent on ads : $1,268,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0

    North Dakota
    Lead in latest poll: McCain +3
    Last voted Democrat: 1964
    Amount Obama has spent on ads: $157,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $71,000

    North Carolina
    RCP Average: McCain +3.7
    Last voted Democrat: 1976
    Amount Obama has spent on ads: $1,620,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0

    RCP Average: McCain +5.3
    Last voted Democrat: 1992
    Amount Obama has spent on ads: $136,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0

    RCP Average: McCain +7.0
    Last voted Democrat: 1992
    Amount Obama has spent on ads: $1,824,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0

    RCP Average: McCain +7.0
    Last voted Democrat: 1964
    Amount Obama has spent on ads: $88,000
    Amount McCain has spent on ads: $0

    More importantly-if you read further in the link, these numbers haven’t changed much despite McCain’s slight spending and in a case like Montana, Obama has gone down even though McCain hasn’t spent a dime.

    It’s not just a case of spending money on crapshoots, though that’s part of it. It’s a case of just not reaping that much of a benefit when you do spend it.

    Anon (db8e0c)

  52. You can’t shine the light on for a true-believer like Peter, but Obama outspent Hillary in Pennsylvania by a 4 to 1 margin and the result…a 40 pt beatdown.

    The fact is that Obama is not a very likeable candidate and the more people hear and see him the more objectionable he becomes…just today we get another lecture from Obama about how stingy Americans are in giving.

    The best chance Obama had for winning was to stay on vacation and let his “tingle brigade” in the MSM coo repeatedly about the “change and hope”.

    No gonna happen.

    LogicalUS (742bd0)

  53. LogicalUS, not to mention that Obama is flat out wrong about American “stinginess”. Offensively so.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  54. LogicalUS, not to mention that Obama is flat out wrong about American “stinginess”. Offensively so.

    Comment by SPQR — 8/20/2008 @ 6:46 pm

    No kidding. Especially since his very own half-brother’s living in squalor in Kenya with nary a dime from “$10000 summer camps and music lessons for the kids” Brobama.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  55. I’m sure the Brothers in Pa. will vote overwhelmingly for the Anointed Turdmeister, but will all those racist crackers who voted en masse for Hillary, actually come out for the Magic Negro? I denounce my racist, misanthropic, misogynist self.
    The worry is that someone who can stop the seas and temperatures from rising, indeed who has seas receding, should be able to trounce a dirty old white man in an election, especially with the help of acorn, Soros, the Daley machine, a fawning/fellating press, adoring Hollywood harlots, etc.

    Nobama 2008!

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  56. It’s not just a case of spending money on crapshoots, though that’s part of it. It’s a case of just not reaping that much of a benefit when you do spend it.

    Thanks for all that information, Anon. If McCain has to put any amount of funds into even one or two states that he thinks are a GOP given, he can’t put them into the crucial swing states. It’s impressive that Obama has even a (slight) lead in Red states like Indiana and Virginia, but that’s not the nut of the situation. The nut of the situation is: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida. I think it’s brilliant to get the message out to the Red states. There are a lot of rightfully disillusioned and angry people in this country. One of the stupid things the Democratic party has done in the past is to discount the Red states and it has hurt them. This seems like a national agenda and it shows that the DNC plans to reach out to everyone. And this isn’t just about a Presidential election, although that’s key but recapturing the Senate and house with filibuster proof majorities.

    I think Obama’s probably going to increase spending in the red states, because if this election comes down to one of attrition in terms of money, Obama is going to win, because he’s flush now and he’s going to be swimming in dollars after the convention and as the race sharpens in September and October.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  57. #53 LogicalUS

    Obama outspent Hillary in Pennsylvania by a 4 to 1 margin and the result…a 40 pt beatdown.

    But he won the nomination and defeated the most powerful and probably the smartest democratic family in the country. Not an inconsiderable accomplishment. Not at all.

    *Adjusts bowler hat, wags mustache, twirls cane and exits stage left*

    Peter (e70d1c)

  58. If McCain has to put any amount of funds into even one or two states that he thinks are a GOP given, he can’t put them into the crucial swing states.

    Peter – Sure, but in at least a few of those instances, he hasn’t put anything.

    Literally. Nothing. Obama’s spent a couple million on Georgia where McCain is +7. McCain’s spent nothing. There’s not a chance Obama will win Georgia. It’s just a waste of a couple million of Obama’s money. If it comes down a situation where McCain is trading $200,000 of his money for $2 million of Obama’s money being spent – I think in a lot of cases that’s a bargain he’d take.

    I’m sure Obama’s flush with money and I’m sure Obama will be flush with money, it’s just everybody’s gotten it in their head that more money –> more votes, and so far that just doesn’t seem to be happening here.

    (FWIW, those poll numbers were as of Aug. 4, McCain now has a slight lead in Indiana and VA)

    Anon (damnit don't blow my cover) (db8e0c)

  59. Comment by Anon (damnit don’t blow my cover) — 8/20/2008 @ 11:13 pm

    Tag left over – I’m posting here to get rid of it.

    Anon (db8e0c)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2077 secs.