Posted on 11/09/2016 6:51:22 AM PST by C19fan
Donald Trump pulled off one of the biggest upsets in American political history when he toppled Hillary Clinton in the U.S. presidential election on Tuesday - and he did it using far less cash than his rival.
Relying heavily on an unorthodox mix of social media, unfiltered rhetoric, and a knack for winning free TV time, the New York real estate magnate likely paid less than $5 per vote during his insurgent White House bid, about half what Clinton paid, according to a Reuters analysis of campaign finance records and voting data. Those figures assume the candidates spent all the funds they raised.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
I’d wager the price of a Clinton speech just got slashed by 80%...its almost as if the money was about more than the speeches...
Political operatives chose types to run who are weak and pliable. (yes, not everyone can hire one of the top people - they chose people they feel can raise lots of money and will listen to THEM) Why would they do that? Easier to get 'marks' to go for large ad buys.
The problem: pliable types can get elected but can't govern. They're wet noodles while running - AND wed noodles while governing.
The system's incentives are producing the crap we're getting. It's why the ‘operatives’ of both parties ran against Trump. The first thing Paul Ryan and Trump need to do is switch the incentives for electing our champions. A Jeb type might be a blessing for a Mike Murphy - a man who Murphy could easily milk dry - but he would NOT have been a blessing for the country. Same with Hillary... she's a composite of her handlers...
This election is hopefully - the death of the political operative as kingmaker... e
Russ Feingold lost Wisconsin for Hillary. Had he not run many would have stayed at home.
Yes indeed. But the campaign cut the exp ns s to the bone. And the key state margins were razor- thin as a result. Very risky and it scared some of us to the core. Anyway he WON!! Yippeeeeeeee!
Talk about a return on investment. Each of us who donated can consider an ROI of 20 votes per $100 given.
This is true, but I think a lot of Trump’s success here is sui generis and dependent on his unique personality and the unique political circumstances. I’m not sure others would be able to replicate his electoral model easily.
The states you claim were razor thin were astonishing huge victories...ads would not have made a difference. This was about the people. You thought it was too close? How many Herman Cain Trump cards did you hand out? How many precincts did you walk? How many minds did YOU change?
Quit yer bellyaching
Headline misleading...
Campaign expenditures per vote realized...
This is only going by funds raised too.
Trump is so thrifty, he probably has 75% of his donations in the bank.
Cheap? Only if you are counting dollars. He’s fully invested his time and his ambitions.
Well, compared to hilary’s votes, anyway.
I’m not bellyaching. (And I worked my ass off for mr trump). The latest official results I got in the news reports that HilLIARy won the popular vote. That’s a terrible thing for USA that there were so
Many people preferring such a corrupt liar - it’s Obama all
Over again except that Thank God the distribution of that majority vote enabled Pa, mi, wi to give their electoral votes to us
“...owing NO ONE!!!”
That right there is the reason why the establishment (both left and right), MSM and big business were hell bent on defeating Trump. A president that can’t be bought, extorted, blackmailed or otherwise coerced in any way, shape or form is not any use to them.
We win. They lose.
TRUMP!
Worth repeating, ludly.
Trump enters the Whitehouse owing NO ONE!
Well, I guess I “bought” about 60 Votes for Trump. LOL
Under Budget and ahead of Schedule.
It shows the wisdom of the founders. Just because two or theee population centers do something does not make it good for the whole country
It is why we have an EC
Agreed!
He owes the American people to keep his promises.
Don't you think that he KNOWS that?
Miracle, certainly. When have we seen such efficiency out of such a small popular vote? Leverage. Billionaires did not get that way by shelling out millions that they did not have to. I look forward to such frugality at the helm of the country. This definitely is a multivariate problem, like a chess game. He has to sell his presidency, and he has to sell his agenda afterwards. I’d give him a frugality award already.
I don’t follow the mass media any more so don’t know how visible his mass media advertising was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.