LibriumArcana.Games

Posted: **Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:14 pm**

President Barack Obama and the Democrats raised $181 million in September — their largest monthly haul since he launched his reelection bid, his campaign announced Saturday.

"Some amazing news this morning: 1,825,813 people came together to raise $181 million for this campaign in September," the campaign said on Twitter.

"If you gave $5, it helped. 98% of September's contributions were $250 or less, with an average contribution of $53," it said.

The figures combine the Obama campaign's fund raising with Democratic National Committee efforts. The amount fell short of the Obama and DNC's single-month record, set in September 2008, of $193 million. Romney has yet to make public his fund-raising haul.

Obama campaign manager, Jim Messina, emailed supporters with the "huge news."
Messina emphasized that the campaign and DNC had pulled in more than 10 million donations in 2012, a record.
"Day in and day out, what gives the President confidence and inspiration is knowing that you have his back -- that matters," said Messina. "We're all going to do the best we can over next 31 days to honor that support."

Normally I would expect Romney to out fund Obama, after all Obama is relying on grassroots, small contributions while Romney is milking millionaries. That said in September before the debate there was a general air of Romney being a lost cause, which would slow down the money. It's likely Mitt has alot more money flowing his way right now.

I should note that the law of diminishing returns is at play here. As long as Obama stays within a certain range of Romney, it doesn't matter if Mitt has more money. 152 Million dollars worth of ads isn't noticeably more effective then 149 million dollars worth of ads. Expect for making me pine for laws limiting advertising for politicians.

Posted: **Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:21 pm**

Yeah you guys seriously need some kind of legislation that puts a damper on campaign funds and spending.

Posted: **Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:10 pm**

We gotta replace our Supreme Court first...

Posted: **Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:26 am**

Even then Supreme Courts are hesitant to overrule previous precedents. I know that this is going to sound defeatist, but seriously I'm just trying to be pragmatic in saying that it's a majorly uphill battle to reform the campaign financing system when it serves the best interests of the very people who'd have to regulate it as well as the folks who profit most by keeping the system intact and pumping money to the legislators.

As for Obama relying on the small donors, that's not the entire truth. He gains margin by outraising anybody else in the small-donation field, but the largest portion (43% in 2008) of his donations clocked in at a thousand or higher. 23% donated 201$ to 999$, and 34% was the 200$ and lower. The grassroots funding is real and useful, but ultimately he makes his bank on the big money donors like any other candidate.

Source.

Posted: **Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:46 am**

That still means the majority of his donators are small cash man. Hell the 43% isn't very useful either. In a Presidential campaign 1000$ is still small change and the difference between 1000$ and a 1,000,000 is a bit more meaningful then the difference between a 1000 and a 100 at this level.

Posted: **Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:07 pm**

You're talking regulated hard cash, though. The millions are flowing to the PACs, and he's got his share of those too. As I recall, the donation limit these days is 2k, which means that 43% provide the larger share of his money. He might have a larger amount of small-money donors, but that doesn't mean he's going to be strapped when it comes to the max donation crowd. So then the small-money donors become extra margin of victory, as I said.

As for this time around, I haven't seen the figures but I'll bet you the princely sum of one dollar American that his percentage of small-money donors has dropped when we get the final numbers. I'll go further and bet that the 999$ and under has dropped by at least ten points.

Posted: **Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:17 pm**

Of course it has. It always drops. He still has what my Grandmother would call a mighty amount though and I'll double your bet that he has more than Romney.

As for the Pacs and "Super" Pacs (Ugh) your point is valid and true but what do you expect him to do? If he refused any Pac aide he would be toast. These dark days you gotta use the Pacs if you wanna win a national election.

Posted: **Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:28 pm**

Oh believe me, I know he wouldn't be anywhere near the office without playing the game. I did hold it against him for offering to subsist on public funding and then balking when he drew an opponent for whom that was a viable route while for Obama it'd mean leaving untold millions on the table. But against Romney, shit, he's got to take the cash to stay in the game.

And I do expect he's got more than Romney. The Dems have cut mightily into the Republican corporate fundraising edge over the past decade, though I expect we'd both agree that it's not a positive trend overall. But Citizen's United, etc.

LibriumArcana.Games

Obama raises $181 million in September

#1 Obama raises $181 million in September

#2 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#3 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#4 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#5 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#6 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#7 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September

#8 Re: Obama raises $181 million in September