Unprecedented fundraising
We're a long way out from the '08 elections, and there are alot of Republican deep pockets as yet untapped, but I really am amazed by the broad differences in the Democratic and Republican fundraising totals even down into the Congressional races.
Congressional elections in Presidential years are always a little weirder because of "coattails," but just as a read of sentiment, these fundraising gaps are significant.
I'm really wondering how it's going to play out into next summer. Do a small number of wealthy Republicans try to level the field by massively funding a few 527's? If there is no "moral values" candidate, do the Scaife's, etc, sit this one out?
Or is the whole thing just a "business expense," with funding flowing to the likely winner?
(Also, I'd be really curious how many current Dem funders have donated to Republicans in the past. Does this represent a shift from party to party or just a change of response rate within the traditional donors?)
Congressional elections in Presidential years are always a little weirder because of "coattails," but just as a read of sentiment, these fundraising gaps are significant.
I'm really wondering how it's going to play out into next summer. Do a small number of wealthy Republicans try to level the field by massively funding a few 527's? If there is no "moral values" candidate, do the Scaife's, etc, sit this one out?
Or is the whole thing just a "business expense," with funding flowing to the likely winner?
(Also, I'd be really curious how many current Dem funders have donated to Republicans in the past. Does this represent a shift from party to party or just a change of response rate within the traditional donors?)
posted by mikevotes at
7:44 AM
5 Comments:
This shift in fundraising is historic, and I think significant. And it's not just the amount of money, but that fact that Dems are raising substantial funds from small, individual donors is very telling. Are these folks who donated to Repub candidates in the past? I don't know. Using only myself as a barometer, I think we're seeing the waking of a large, politically inactive population stepping up to the plate. We are people who felt that politics and government was a largely self-correcting machine. The past 7 years has SCARED US TO DEATH as to what can happen of the barbarians are left unchecked.
I think the Dems are attracting the attention of mainstream America who are not necessarily partisans, but are just decent people looking for effective, responsible, open and honest government.
Al Franken had an interesting piece on YouTube talking about the difference between Repub special interest fundraising vs. his grass roots fundraising.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90eEuKDs-C8
Edwards has also talked about separating the Dem party form lobbyist money, not only the stop the "rigging" of the system but also to be able to present themselves to America as being a people powered party, versus the party of special interest.
By
-epm, at 8:46 AM
Good summary -epm. Let's hope it shows at the polling stations.
By
Anonymous, at 1:02 PM
EPM, The number of small donors is pretty significant. And, without any real backing, I would guess that the small Republican donors are down thus far.
I'm a little less optimistic that this will lead to a long term "awakening." I'm willing to allow that opinions and party affiliations are shifting likely to some permanent degree, but as for a very broad, longer term activism, I'm not that optimistic.
Perhaps it's just my own pessimism, but the American people tend to have a very short memory and attention span.
If things were to start going better, all of the motivations today will be long forgotten. However, there will likely be a small new group of activists that spawn from this Democratically significant period, and they will begin to show up in 10 years or so. (Denying all their youthful stances, no doubt.)
And, I understand the argument against lobbyist money, but from a strictly strategic standpoint I think that would be a big mistake.
Look at all the money the Republican machine has raised off deregulation and lowering taxes into deficit. I don't think you have to sell your soul, but in the long haul completely cutting all of that funding out of your party would make things incredibly difficult.
And, completely refusing that money would make all of them enemies.
I think the answer is to shift the center of the debate left, and then take their money as "protection."
The incredibly well connecetd and influential lobbyists would still get paid, and you get that money.
The question I would guess is who controls that relationship.
Just thinking out loud.
By
mikevotes, at 1:49 PM
Or is the whole thing just a "business expense," with funding flowing to the likely winner?
In my estimation, basically, yes. This is why I can't get too caught up in the Democrats. At the end of the day they are businessmen (and women).
As long as everyone fights this bi-lateral duel, little progress will be made.
The Dems and the Reps just take turns finding a spot closer to the center than the other, but on their side of the spectrum.
As time goes on, they both get closer and closer to the center.
But now I think we are pulled hawk-right of center and there is a window for change....
O.K. I'm talking crazy now.
Good night.
By
Praguetwin, at 6:44 PM
Yes, very true. They are the same character in respects to lobbying, but there is a difference in emphasis.
And, I agree the center has shifted back, but I would say that represents a shift of sentiment. There was a time the center was shifted hawk-right. The politics are just trailing behind.
By
mikevotes, at 9:03 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home