Romney, Giuliani Announce Their Numbers
The campaigns of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giulani announced their second-quarter fundraising numbers -- and neither of them set the world on fire. Rudy raised as much in three months as he did in the previous two, and Romney dropped off his Q1 numbers by a third:
Republican Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign reported an estimated $15 million in primary election contributions from April through June and Mitt Romney trailed closely behind with $14 million raised. ...Overall, Giuliani saw an increase in his fundraising over the first quarter, when he reported nearly $16 million in contributions. About $1 million of that sum was for the general election.
Romney's fundraising fell short of his first quarter, when he raised $20.6 million and lent himself $2.35 million. All of Romney's money is for the primary election.
The Romney camp reported $12 million cash on hand, equal to the amount he had in the bank at the end of the first quarter. Aides said the campaign also boosted its number of donors from 32,000 in the first quarter to 80,000 for the first six months of the year.
Rudy's increase only comes to about a million or so over his Q1 numbers, but most people will recall that Giuliani only had two months of fundraising in that quarter. This time, he had all three months and only netted a million more in primary money. That's still better news than Romney got for his organizational efforts. Despite riding high in the Iowa and New Hampshire polls, Romney took in about a little under 33% less in Q2, and Romney has had to loan himself an additional $6 million to keep his financing edge.
Consider, then, the stories over the last two days about the McCain campaign's woes. He dropped about $2 million from his Q1 numbers. He only trailed Romney by less than $3 million in Q2 despite taking a beating over immigration, and Rudy by $4 million in primary funds. His campaign may need a lot of work and probably remains Quixotic at best, but in comparison, his performance doesn't appear as bad as it looked yesterday.
What's happening with Republican fundraising? The Democratic frontrunners both increased their take over their terrific Q1 totals. Have Republicans punished the entire field over immigration? Or are GOP donors holding their breath for Fred Thompson, who is expected to announce later this month? If it isn't one of those two explanations, it may be that the GOP isn't generating a lot of enthusiasm -- and that could mean big trouble for the Republicans regardless of who they nominate.
Posted by Ed Morrissey on July 3, 2007 3:59 PM | Comments (15) | TrackBacks (1)
Comments (15)
Posted by flenser | July 3, 2007 4:30 PM
What's happening with Republican fundraising?
None of the "frontrunners" are very appealing candidates. I'd like to think that after the immigration debacle people are taking a closer look at whats out there and are not liking what they see. But that may be wishful thinking on my part.
Posted by Dave Moelling | July 3, 2007 4:46 PM
The election is still a long way away. The leading GOP candidates are all responsible adults and would do an acceptable job, so why donate so early.
Posted by Ron C | July 3, 2007 4:49 PM
This earlier, and earlier and earlier crap is what has most of us genuinely put off by the whole thing.
Watch - we will have one of the lowest turnouts for a presidential election in US history.
Posted by PK | July 3, 2007 5:20 PM
The amount of money a candidate raises shouldn't be so directly linked to their future success.
I don't understand why more of the population doesn't revolt against the requirement that you need at least $100 million to wage a successful campaign.
To me it suggests strongly that politics has become nothing more than a type of big-ticket Hollywood production, with investors waiting on the sidelines to cash in.
And that in turn leads one to believe that politicians have largely become irrelevant to the ordinary man, and are instead simply servants to special interests, big donors, and so forth.
So if Fred Thompson or anyone else wants to really light the population up, they need to do and say things that will convince the ordinary man that the political establishment once again has value (over and above simply running the country's administration)
To make a contrast, when I hear and see Hillary Clinton speak, it is clear that from her point of view the political establishment is nothing more than a vehicle to power, a means to a greater end (in her eyes), and the people be damned. She's not in it to make the country better, she's in it for herself, and her entire attention is devoted to trying to fool the population into thinking otherwise.
All that said, I suspect the Republican fund raising is down because Republican's are taking a wait-and-see approach, and are keeping their powder dry. If there is one defining difference between liberals and conservatives it is that conservatives are never afraid to make decisions based on principle, even if it puts them on the losing side for a while. Liberals on the other hand will happily support any low life if they think he will win. They will compromise their principles in a split second if they can get something for that compromise.
Posted by Jeanette | July 3, 2007 5:44 PM
Do ya think it has anything to do with such an early and long primary race? I'm not donating anything yet. I'll bet a lot of people are waiting to see what Thompson decides to do too.
Posted by quickjustice | July 3, 2007 5:50 PM
Big trouble for Republicans. The country is tired of the GOP. At the moment, this election is for the Democrats to lose, not for the GOP to win. That could change with changed circumstances. The Democrat-controlled Congress is wearing out its welcome rapidly.
On the other hand, never underestimate the ability of the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Posted by btenney | July 3, 2007 6:13 PM
Every so often the country has to engage in self flagellation by electing Democrats. After all living a nightmare is more educational than just hearing about it. I think of it as the ultimate in voter education.
I only hope that when the voters give the conservatives another chance they use it more wisely .
Posted by Bennett | July 3, 2007 7:23 PM
Isn't this good news? If we had one candidate with a huge fundraising advantage, the "aura of inevitability" would attach and the whole thing would be over before it's even started. I think many likely Republican donors just aren't that interested yet.
Or maybe we're all simply disappointed with what our donations have gotten us in the past. Not the best value for our dollars in many instances. But I write that, having just hung up on someone who called soliciting a donation for the National Republican Congressional Committee.
Posted by abwtf![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/nav-commenters.gif)
| July 3, 2007 7:42 PM
There are no doubt big problems for the GOP next year, but the fund-raising money isn't the whole picture.
For Dems, Hillary vs. not-Hillary is a big deal. For Repubs, Fred, Rudy, Mitt and McCain all have flaws so one winning over the other is less important because whichever it is will be better than the Dem candidate.
Posted by Karen | July 4, 2007 3:36 AM
The front 3 people are not REAL conservatives. They have all been very liberal during their times in office. Therefore, I don't see them having access to a lot of the conservative base pocketbooks and wallets.
Fred just got in. Give him time. But as most here have said, it is still early. The 4Q will be very important. By then, most of the losers will be out of the race and it will be more focused.
McCain just needs to pack up and go home. He has not a snowball's chance in hell of getting this nomination.
With Obama's impressive INDIVIDUAL count of donors (multiple times anyone else's count), this is good new for conservatives. Hillary will have to demolish him in the primaries. It will get delightfully ugly.
The Romney/Guilliani/Fred flaws are all known, so I don't see them getting as damaged in the primary.
Win Fred Win!!!!!!!!!!!! (already donated to Fred so far, more on the way)
Posted by Bob Arthur | July 4, 2007 8:48 AM
If it isn't one of those two explanations, it may be that the GOP isn't generating a lot of enthusiasm...
Or, it could be because it is July of 2007. Republicans are grown-ups, and we know that November of 2008 is a long ways from now. I'm not giving until we pick a candidate, personally.
Posted by Immolate | July 4, 2007 9:53 AM
It's a Fred thing. A lot of the grass roots are keeping their ammo dry until they know what the battle is going to look like. That should change today methinks.
Posted by richard mcenroe | July 4, 2007 2:54 PM
Hint: "You're all a bunch of racist yahoos tying up our switchboard" is not the best fundraising slogan...
Posted by ERNurse | July 5, 2007 1:59 AM
Captain, I don't know why you don't see it for what it is. Put simply, it is this: Republican voters are simply waiting for a Republican candidate. Don't you get it?
Posted by RWBlack | July 5, 2007 5:09 AM
I wonder how many Big Money donors are like this little fish, no money voter? Up until I began to hear about the draft Fred movement, I was disappointed in the Republican field. It reminded me of when the choice was Bob Dole or… Well, there was no other choice. Big Money is waiting for someone to ring their bell. If Fred does not do it, Big Money could stay home for ’08.