Posted on 07/24/2007 7:56:03 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
From almost any angle, Republicans are facing a Democratic financial tsunami in 2008.
In the first six months of this year, Democratic federal candidates and the party's three national committees raised $381 million compared with the $291 million their counterparts collected. That amounts to a $90 million advantage and means that 57 percent of the total raised by all political candidates and committees has gone to the Democrats.
And that's the good news for Republicans.
When the cash on hand is added up for presidential, House and Senate candidates, as well as the party committees, the picture is even bleaker. Overall, Democrats reported having $314 million in cash compared with the Republicans' $190 million, which means that 62 percent of the political cash is now held in Democratic accounts.
What does that mean at political micro-levels? The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has a 10-1 cash advantage over its Republican adversary, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has a cash advantage that is three times greater than the National Republican Senatorial Committee's take.
In the presidential field, the Democrats' two top candidates -- Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) -- each have nearly as much money in the bank as the combined savings of the entire 2008 Republican field. The 10 Republicans running for president reported a combined total of $36 million cash on hand; Obama has $35 million and Clinton has $33 million available for the primary race.
"I cannot remember a time when the Democrats have had an advantage in the party committees and at the candidate level at the same time," said Michael J. Malbin, executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute.
Certainly, money alone doesn't win elections. Campaign trails leading to the Oval Office and to the lowly House echo with the tales of well-funded campaigns that met early ends. Among the most notable: Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's 2004 presidential primary bid.
But money does create options, and at this pace, the Democrats see theirs growing, while the Republicans may well be losing some.
Take a look at the House. In January, newly selected DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) laid out a plan to defend his vulnerable freshmen while simultaneously attacking Republicans who eked through last November. "If we continue the current pace, we will have the resources to fully support that strategy," he said. Meanwhile, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who heads the National Republican Congressional Committee, started the year with quite a different set of priorities: Pay off the committee's debt and then start tucking money away for the campaign season.
Cole has made good on his promise. The committee has raised $29 million and spent $27 million. Today, it has got $2 million in the bank and $4 million in debts outstanding, according to its reports. Cole seems on track to move the committee's balance from red to black by year's end.
But that's when the hard slog begins, because the Democrats' edge isn't just the byproduct of high energy within their ranks. The long-feared Republican fundraising machine also appears to be in decline. While the Republican National Committee has maintained its dominance over the Democratic National Committee, raising $45 million to the DNC's $27 million, even that edge is on the lower end of historic patterns.
And consider this: When President Bush was running for reelection in 2004, his appearance at the RNC's annual spring gala raised $38.5 million. During last year's congressional campaign season, the presidential gala raised $17 million. This year, it raised $10.5 million.
In addition, the loss of control of Congress has stripped Republicans of one of their most lucrative fundraising assets: committee chairmanships. According to a Center for Inquiry study released last week, corporate donors have made a seismic shift since January toward the new Democratic chairmen. In the first six months of this year, political action committees donated $41 million to Democrats, compared with $24 million for Republicans. During the previous year, Republicans received $32 million in PAC contributions, compared with $22 million for the Democrats, the report concluded.
The presidential campaign season also looms as an obstacle to congressional fundraising. In private conversations, Republican fundraising experts dismiss the yawning gap between their primary field and the Democrats' roster. "When the nominee becomes clear, he will have all the resources he needs," said one longtime Republican operative.
History supports that notion. After scraping through hard times in the 2003 Democratic primary, Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) found himself flush with cash -- even matching the Bush-Cheney machine -- when he swept the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries.
But that gush of money does not automatically extend to the congressional committees. Van Hollen said he spends plenty of time these days warning donors: "Do not take the House for granted. Things can change quickly."
Even if the money rolls in, managing it frugally can be crucial. In the 2006 cycle, the Republican House committee raised more than the Democrats. What both sides said helped tip the scales in many races was that the Democrats outspent the Republicans in the final weeks of that contentious campaign cycle.
How did they manage that? They had more cash in the bank.
Fred.
What are the differences in INDIVIDUAL donors?
If all the democrat money comes from George Sorros affiliations and the like, it is a suspect story.
Ain't it the truth. But it has a lot to do with this statement:
“I'll see you in the rose garden for the signing.”
DING DING DING! Give that man a cigar!
Arlen Specter, Trent Lott, John McCain - are the top three reasons why I quit giving to the Republican party, of which I had been a proud member for 30 years. Until these brain-dead dinosaurs are gone from our midst, and the “Pygmy’s and trained seals” that comprise the rest of the GOP field disappear into the night, they will get not ONE THIN DIME from me.
Thanks - rant over...
And that’s what you run on. Democrats are for amnesty for illegals. Remind the public that as weak as it may have seemed, there were strong, principled Republicans who stood in the doorway and stopped the illegal immigration shamnesty bill.
Remind the voters about Democratic pork attached to military pay raise bills, forcing vetos that they tried to spin to their advantage.
I take some heart that in polls where the sole question is “can you see yourself ever voting for Hillary Clinton for President” that majority is still saying “NO!” The only thing worse than Hildebeest as President is B. Hussein Obama.
I fear for the good people of Iraq if a Dumocrat is elected.
Incorrect - for fiscal conservatives, it is called the Club for Growth. They only support GOP candidates who support pro-growth policies and tax cuts. RINOs need not apply - in fact, CFG has taken the lead in supporting conservative primary challengers against RINO incumbents, something all FReepers should actively support.
I know by giving money to CFG, it will not be squandered on the Linc Chafees and Arlen Specters of the world.
The RNC can go pound sand, as far as I am concerned.
All this means is Republicans are better with money, and wait for the right time and product to invest in wisely. Democrats on the other hand love to spend, but get very little return.
But everybody already knew this.
Thanks for the info. I’ll be sure to check them out!
How much $$ did the RSCC pee away supporting that worst of RINOs Lincoln Chaffee? Sorry if the truth hurts.
Bingo!
The GOP is reaping the reaction to those who joined with dems to discard US sovereignty and continue to violate their mandate to protect this nation.
Let these Dems ‘pour sand down a rat hole’.
I am ‘keeping my powder dry’.
As in the past, they will grasp defeat from the jaws of victory by nominating a looser, such as Gore, Kerry, and currently Clinton.
As for President Bush, the opposition has sucked all the oxygen out of the room by demonizing him successfully. Everything is ‘Bush’s Fault’. The ‘swarm’ never thinks past the next election cycle in favor of the future of this country.
The ‘collectivist’ mentality, the dependency index, etc have tilted the scales. If the left is allowed to frame the debate, we loose. Gone are our ideology of individual liberty and economic freedom.
One can no longer debate issues in this current atmosphere. Any issues.
YES! The Club for Growth (I wonder how much money they are raising????) But, also, I believe Republican’s have learned to give to INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES, NOT to the “Party” and until a viable candidate arises....little money will flow.
I agree. Hillary has been thrown softballs for so many years, I don’t think she has any idea what she’s in store for. Glenn Beck on Headline News, Sean Hannity on Fox will not be spinning “good” Hillary stories. The blogs will go for her with a vengence. Hillary is used to pampering by the press. Even now there’s no real outcry because we’re biding our time. I’m sure she’ll try to prep herself with an answer but really, her contempt for the American people will show through. She won’t be able to simply campaign in California and New York. Wait’ll she tries to win over Texas.
And I hope against hope that some enterprising person does one, just one, anti-Hillary commercial featuring Billy Dale discussing how he had to spend the entirety of his savings defending himself against the Clinton smear machine.
I hope the FBI files come up. And how her husband’s whoring around was the fault of a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
Lots.
No matter how many Democrat ads I see, I'm not going to be voting Democrat.
Money is highly overrated because Democrats believe they are entitled to win all elections, and have to find something to blame when they lose.
Their favorite excuses are that the election was "stolen" or that they "couldn't get their message out" because the opposition had more money than they.
Fred is going to beat Hillary. He's the only GOP wannabe who can.
PS - Isn't it heartwarming how the mainstream media wants to certify Fred's conservative credentials for us?
I'm sure it's because they want to make sure that, if the GOP wins the Presidency, a true conservative is at the helm.
</sarcasm>
The RNC is Lucy holding the football, it’s the same guys that have disappointed us before. I toss the solicitation letters in the trash.
It won’t be until Fred Thompson gets into the race an forms a fund raising committee called the “New Republicans” that most of we conservatives will get out our checkbooks. The present list of GOP candidates is not the ones we want to back. For senate and house, the state GOP parties will have to carry the ball and get candidates and money to take back congress.
Exactly! The GOP has bought into the liberal philosophy of taking from the productive members of society and giving it away to the nonproductive members in an attempt to buy votes. Get a clue, People, it's not going to work that way with us.
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.