MyDD :: $1.2 million versus $11,000

$1.2 million versus $11,000

by politicsmatters, Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 10:26:17 AM EST

As we see on this site and on other sites, there are some Clinton supporters who are not going to support the presumptive nominee, Barack Obama. Some even say they'll vote for McCain.

But how common is that? Polls cast some light on that, but so do fundraising figures. And in June, the pattern was stark.

Thousands of Hillary Clinton's donors gave at least $1.2 million to Democrat Barack Obama in June, accelerating a migration from her presidential campaign that began months ago.

Republican John McCain collected about $11,000 from that group in the same period, according to an Arizona Republic analysis of Federal Election Commission records.

The numbers suggest no widespread defections from the Democratic Party after its hard-fought primary season between Clinton and Obama ended the first week of June. McCain has hoped that many of Clinton's supporters would join him in an anti-Obama backlash.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic /news/articles/2008/07/28/20080728prezmo ney0726.html

In other words, of the $1,211,000 donated by Clinton supporters in June to either Obama or McCain, over 99% went to Obama and less than 1% went to McCain.

That's what Democratic donors are doing, folks - They're donating to Senator Obama. Keep these realities in mind when you read diaries and posts from those Democrats who aren't supporting Obama.

Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, fundraising (all tags)

Permalink :: 31 Comments :: Post a Comment

i'll donate to Obama (2.00 / 5)

as soon as i have money again!

vote blue in 2008

by sepulvedaj3 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 10:36:10 AM EST

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 1)

Thousands of Hillary Clinton's donors gave at least $1.2 million to Democrat Barack Obama in June, accelerating a migration from her presidential campaign that began months ago.

This figure, $1.2 Million, is said to represent only three percent (3%) of Clinton donors

But, hey, you're correct that it beats John McCain, though.

by Check077 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 10:38:09 AM EST

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 3)

Yep - 3% is not big. But it is still significant that of those Clinton supporters who donated, less than 1% donated to McCain.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 10:49:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

I would think that many of the Clinton supporters who might be tempted to donate to McCain would at least wait to see if she's going to be on the Democratic ticket.

Mind you, I'm not saying McCain will start raking in millions and millions if she's not. The point is valid.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:13:20 AM EST

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

Really?

I supported Obama in my state's contest (after earlier supporting Clinton) and there is absolutely no way I'd ever donate to McCain.

Any Clinton supporter who would do so certainly didn't support Clinton because they agreed with what she'd do as president.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:18:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

I'm not sure what I said that is so shocking to you. Not everyone's decision process is made on some one-dimensional left-right spectrum where they're like "ok, I'm here, the candidates are here and here, I'm picking the one who is closest to me." In fact, I'd go so far as to say that most people don't think that way.

Anyway, I didn't come here to defend people who support McCain. I stand by my point as an empirical matter. If your response is simply that people who donate to McCain are bad Democrats or whatever, then fine, but it's not really responsive to what I wrote.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:37:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

Well, you're right that people vote for all sorts of reasons. For me, it would be inconceivable to vote for a candidate who fits virtually none of the policy preferences of my first choice. That's because, for me, political decisions affect the life chances of each and every one of us.

And, yes, it could be that some are waiting to see who the vp choice is, but that is more a conjecture or hypothesis than an empirical observation.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:49:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

Yea this primary turned my perception on my head.

Only a year ago, primaries were viewed as a small deal that party loyalists took part in to nominate their candidate.

Obviously there is some variation to that, turns out about .5% of Dem primary voters could care less about politics, the country, or the future.

But those people are rare, no true democrat would even think of voting for Bush.

by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 06:16:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 1)

Well, I guess we could play the "no true Scotsman" game. In 2004, 11% of Democrats nationwide voted for Bush. I guess we can talk amongst ourselves about how they weren't real Democrats anyway and good riddance and all that, but personally I would rather have won.

The mentality I see is that if a Republican is considering voting for McCain, we should reach out to them and see if we can convince them to join our team. If an Independent is considering voting for McCain, we should reach out to them and see if we can convince them to join our team. But if a Democrat is considering voting for McCain, we should denounce them as a worthless traitor and make sure that we never, ever do anything which might have the effect of bringing them back into the fold.

This primary also changed my perception. I was raised to believe that liberals were the open-minded ones. But I've seen, and I continue to see, such a total lack of interest in understanding why anyone who doesn't agree with us feels the way they do, that I've had to adjust that belief.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 09:04:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

People who will donate out of blind spite (2.00 / 2)

are much less common than those who will post anonymously on the Internet out of blind spite.

Also, there's nothing compelling in a positive way about John McCain. Republicans aren't even particularly motivated to donate for him.

by Geekesque on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:16:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: People who will donate out of blind spite (none / 0)

I don't happen to agree with the view that the PUMA types are universally motivated by nothing more than "blind spite." I think that's a glib way of declining to grapple with their actual motivations.

That said, I agree with you that McCain really hasn't been offering anyone outside the Republican base a reason to see him as a viable option.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:54:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

McCain can't even raise money from the (2.00 / 3)

base. The anti-tax nuts, the fundieclowns, and the wacko xenophobes can't stand him. His only base is the media, and their only contributions have been in benignly neglecting his gaffamaticism.

As far as the PUMA's go, donating money to John McCain really could have no other motivation other than to punish the Democratic party for not doing as they wished.

by Geekesque on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:11:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain can't even raise money from the (none / 0)

Mojo'd for the phrase "benignly neglecting his gaffamaticism."

Stop the racism. Fight the smears.

by CrazyDrumGuy on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 08:34:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

I think it's more likely that the big money Clinton donors are sitting on their wallets until they hear the VP announcement. Depending on his selection, they'll then decide whether or not to donate to Obama, or the DNC, or to congressional or local races.

by LakersFan on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:40:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 4)

Money talks. BS walks.

by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:25:29 AM EST

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

Now I want those saying they would never vote obama, and will support mccain, to put thier mouths where thier money is. i.e. back in thier pockets.

by holder on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 05:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 6)

It is more than money.
My wife was an ardent Clinton supporter.
She now walks 2 nights a week for the Obama Campaign to register voters or have them fill out the form necessary to receive a mail-in ballot.
"I have more time than money" she puts it.

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:55:31 AM EST

The vast majority of those 18 Million (2.00 / 6)

voters are loyal Democrats who share Clinton's values and policy goals.

Plus, John McCain really, really sucks.

by Geekesque on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:17:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 3)

I hope she knows how much her work matters!

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:44:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (2.00 / 1)

Excellent diary, thanks for sharing the actual numbers. Perhaps this will silence some of the lunacy that's out there. I gave $50 last month and bought a new yard sign. Nothing this month, but that has more to do with being broke than anything else. Summer is always tough for us, as my partner has no income in the summer (he's a professor at a public university), so I have to budget very carefully.

"It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for subtlety". Salvor Hardin

by Denny Crane on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 11:56:17 AM EST

Re: $1.2 million versus $11,000 (none / 0)

This diary will make some kitties come out of the woodwork.

Welcome to a landslide WITH white working class, latinos, women and holding on sweeties!!!

by spacemanspiff on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 12:07:56 PM EST

Not A Penny For Penn (2.00 / 2)

As an Edwards > Hillary> Obama supporter I do wish Obama supporters would help retire Hillary's campaign debt as a show of party unity...but at the same time...the thought of one cent going to Mark Penn makes me want to vomit.

I think Bill is going to have to do some extra paid speaking gigs to fix this one.

John McCain: Country Club First!

by demwords on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 01:37:03 PM EST

Re: Not A Penny For Penn (2.00 / 1)

It wasn't much, but I made a donation to her campaign the day after she dropped out. I diaried here and at DailyKos asking others to do the same.

I didn't get a very positive response.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 03:36:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not A Penny For Penn (none / 0)

As soon as Penn and Schoen decide to write-off the debt, I'll make a contribution. They actually should have been sued for electoral malpractice.

John McCain: Country Club First!

by demwords on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 04:08:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not A Penny For Penn (none / 0)

I sort of doubt it would be legal to provide millions of dollars in services to a political campaign and then write off the debt.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 08:57:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

voters staying at home (none / 0)

Then there are the HRC supporters who will stay at home rather than vote Democratic if HRC is not on the ticket. i assume they're a bigger group than the HRC supporters who will vote for McCain. Also, from reading HRC blogs I've noticed that some HRC supporters are waiting to see of HRC gets nominated before contributing to McCain (if she is not the nominee). Dozens of times I've seen this list:

#1 HRC
#2 McCain
#3 stay at home

Right now the main focus on the pro-Hillary blogs is on getting HRC nominated.

by Nancy Kallitechnis on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 03:19:55 PM EST

Re: voters staying at home (2.00 / 1)

They're entitled to do that.

Personally, I'm not paying my taxes until I see if the federal government will build me a hoverboard.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 03:37:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: voters staying at home (none / 0)

Well, that ain't gonna happen, sorry. The process is over and has been over for some time.

If you want to support McCain, go ahead, but don't spread that crap around here, okay? Your cnadidate conceeded. Game over.

by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 04:40:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the nomination process (none / 0)

The process is over and has been over for some time.

The nomination process is over when the superdelegates vote next month. Neither of the top candidates got enough pledged delegates to earn the nomination. so the superdelegates have to act as a referee and choose.

If you want to support McCain, go ahead, but don't spread that crap around here, okay?

I never said I was going to vote nor not vote for McCain. I provided evidence why contributions are not a good indicator of whether HRC's supporters will vote for McCain.

Your cnadidate conceeded.

HRC suspended her campaign; she did not concede. HRC didn't release her delegates. She has the support of more than half of the United states, more than Obama based on Rasmussen's recent study. It would be strange for HRC to concede while all the evidence shows she is a stronger general election candidate and she got more secret ballot votes than any other candidate in U.S. history.

by Nancy Kallitechnis on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 07:20:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the nomination process (none / 0)

I'm going to be so glad when the convention is over and I won't have to read this nonsense nor stifle the desire to respond.

(Oh, but this time I respond. Oops.)

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 07:47:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Said it before (2.00 / 1)

and i will say it again.

This election is our chance to bankrupt the GOP/RNC.

They have this huge Waaar chest (imagine booming movie voice) that is as much as Obama's money raised.

Assuming advertising is Bush's only chance they will spend every dollar.

Watch them try and replenish that Waaaar Chest when the troops are coming home and Obama has a 90% approval rating.

Unlike Clinton, I think Obama will have a much smoother first term, I doubt the GOP will steal Congress back in 2010 :D

by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 06:20:01 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.