Captain's Quarters -

When the primaries have ended and we have made our choice, the money will flow. Rudy is polling ahead of Hillary in many Democrat strongholds; if Rudy gets the nomination and continues to look like the one to take down Hillary "while saving the country from another leg of the Bush-Clinton dynasty", the money will flow into the Giuliani campaign. If either Thompson or Romney gets the nomination, I would hope for the same results.

This election cycle started way too early...

Not sure a fair comparison can be made amongst the candidates when comparing flow of donations.

Though Thompson has only been a candidate for a few weeks, people have known for months that he was going to throw his hat into the ring.

Furthermore, without knowing the actual distribution of funds over time, it's pretty shaky ground to declare one a winner at this point.

Perhaps a better comparison (though also flawed) would be to see where Guiliani or Romney were at during their first weeks.

Momentum!

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/pl/061307fredthompson/im:/071003/480/0678f49d250d41c7a0d8daaff3372627;_ylt=Al4CvkMLrpyuneit7kFtBGprWscF

Oh dear.

Were the RNC not so obtuse with their push polling and arrogant unimaginative ways the Republican party would have way more money, IMO. One of the (few)good things you can say about Hillary's campaign is that she at least pretends to care about what people think. She recognized the value of the internet early and has staff who are paying attention to what is being said by the people she is trying to reach. (Some call it pandering but it is responsive at least) There are many good Republican and conservative sites that are trying to communicate their frustrations and ideas but no one seems to be paying attention. I am even paranoid enough to believe that Hillary has paid commenters who go on sites and counteract the negative things that are said about her with scorn and puffery.

I have to acknowledge that at least Fred brings up the idea of federalism. That said, I think it is watered down and poorly delivered. Many just attribute this to MSM bias. But watching him on youtube confirms it.

I have to confess - obviously those of us screaming for a CONSERVATIVE Candidate are NOT putting our money where our mouth is.

And then sit around moaning about why the Conservative Candidates aren't getting any serious attention from anyone else!

Very sad. I personally think we are missing a good bet with Duncan Hunter.

However, it seems that for whatever reason, the GOP is so awash with TARES for candidates, everyone else is getting lost in heavy undergrowth.

But if they cannot organize themselves any better than this, maybe they just don't want it.

Posted by skeptic | October 4, 2007 7:45 PM

I have to acknowledge that at least Fred brings up the idea of federalism. That said, I think it is watered down and poorly delivered. Many just attribute this to MSM bias. But watching him on youtube confirms it.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

But his voting record matches McCain's.

And he was as much in on McCain Feingold as they were, it originally had his name on it, too!

So as far as Federalism is concerned, Fred is all talk and no WALKIN' the talk.

As if numbers can't be fudged.

Anyhoo. I was watching the Fred Thompson interview. The one with Hannity. that came up on U-Tube in three parts. (In the first one, he's got his 4 year old daughter on his lap; and it looks like she sucking on a huge diaphram. Whatever.)

Then, there was a question tossed to the beautiful wife. (About her role.) And,Hannity quotes from "unnamed sources." Ah. But who held a "certain position" on Fred's campaign.

Fred then said "well, we've got hundreds of those."

So, it seems while you're being told about the MONEY; you're not being told about all the expenses.

Just an aside. But when Clarence Thomas talked about driving "his" bus; he said it's NOT ECONOMICAL.

So, sometimes, ya just have to get economic information from one place. To extrapolate it to another.

Meanwhile? McPain fell $4-million into debt.

So, yeah. I'd question the money part; until I saw how it all got spread out.

While I do know that Howie Dean DID raise about $40-million dollars FROM POOR PEOPLE! That's back in the "old days" when Kevin Drum had a blog. Did "cat blogging Fridays." And, people would comment that they'd just flipped Howie Dean other "Franklin." Well? Ya know, back then Howie Dean was showting he was "gonna kill Bush." And, being poor didn't prevent people from thinking they were "funding" that one!

Here?

Well, again, one of the best sources of revenue for the republican party ... has been to tap the base. They don't GET jobs. So, they're not an expenditure.

But from what I read, a lot of conservatives STOPPED.

Stopped producing DIMES.

Is George Soros responsible for keeping the whole show "going?" Nah.

But the people who are throwing money around like crazy, are, in enough cases, those who also want to benefit, when it's spent.

So we're nowhere near knowing what works.

And, what's a giant pile of wasted effort.

Have you been "tapped" to donate as of yet?

The phone calls, done from phone banks, haven't even been started. You know why? Karl Rove left the White House; and is busy writing a book.

Sure. The picture changes when he goes into business of phoning republicans with "offers" they can't resist.

Also, I keep seeing a very weak performance out of the stuff that shows up on Fred. (Excluding whatever it was his daughter was sucking on. It ain't easy for a 4 year old to be included in an interview.) Wow, would that time have been better spent!

While, yes, Thompson's wife is gorgeous. And, someone is dressing her well. (She wants Jackie Kennedy's old wardrobe?) America's not ready.

Rose,

On issues such as NAFTA, North American Community, immigration Duncan Hunter "gets it." Unfortunately, he is a big spender, won't take the tax pledge and is too willing to throw money at the military. Then there is his (alleged) involvement with Duke Cunningham's troubles.

I don't believe that either Juliani or Thompson will pick Hunter as a VP. Duncan is not CFR.

Regarding the large amount of money collected by Democratic candidates in contrast to the small amount collected by Republicans, it's obvious much of the Democratic money is flowing because of Bush-hatred. When the Democrats realize Bush is not running for re-election some of that money will stop rolling in. And when Republicans realize they've got to open their wallet if they don't want Hillary to win, the money will start flowing. This campaign started too soon, but it will settle into its own pace eventually, and everything up to then will only be prologue. F

I think when we get a candidate, we will see the money flowing in. I know that is what I am waiting to see. I will do anything I can to avoid waking up to find Hillary Clinton the president!!!

Maybe Fred can turn his "Cash Momentum" into some charisma on the campaign trail.

He is putting them to sleep in Iowa.

Just to echo some previous sentiments- I think many conservatives are holding onto their money until they see how things shake out. The magic question seems to remain whether or not people will stay home on Election Day depending on the candidates.

I, for one, hope conservatives remember the stakes if Hillary is the nominee...

tmi3rd

A more interesting post would have compared current Republican fundraising with prior election years so that we can see how Republican donors are behaving in context. I think that the strange happenings this time around are with the crazy amounts of money being raised by democrats compared to prior performance. This is speculation however, and not based on any particular research.

I suspect that Hillary is taking advantage of her husband's experience and finding sources of funding that nobody has tapped into in prior cycles. Whether those sources are legitimate or not, I'm not hsure.

Those of us who believe that the great danger is Hillary may be waiting to see how the primary race begins to sort out. For myself, there are at least four acceptible Republican candidates, and none of them is on the fringe. At the moment, it looks like it will be the general election that counts.

In other words, party has become more important than the individual in most cases.

This is why lousy congresscritters keep being re-elected. If the incumbent is a Democrat (without loss of generality, as the mathematicians say) then he will be the Democratic candidate presumptive in the next election. Even Democrats who might want another choice will not get a chance to vote for someone else--even if that person could win by attracting "throw the bum out" votes from Republicans.

On the flip side, the two-party system prevents the government from becoming even more splintered and ineffective than it is.

Rudy has more cash on hand that any other candidate. With Hillary on track to raising over 100 million this year, Rudy is the only candidate that will have enough money to defeat her next year.

If Rudy is the nominee, about 25% of the GOP will bolt. The GOP is already in danger of being a 3rd party. Rudy would be its death knell.

I suggest another possibility. I know that there are hundreds of thousands of voters whose philosophy is conservative yet who have felt betrayed by the GOP in some significant way in the recent past. I need mention only a few of these ways, chiefly spending, immigration (ha!), and gov't "mission creep" (No Child Left Behind, Rx program, etc ad naseum).

Although I have sent contributions to individual candidates, I have pointedly told telephone solicitors for the GOP that I will not contribute to the party until they once again show that conservative values mean something to them. This is from a local precinct chairman.

If I have done this, imagine the throng of disaffected party members who will vote GOP, especially against Billary, but whose enthusiasm for making contributions has been rewarded by disrespect and/or neglect, and are thus saying "Fine, but not with a check from me..!"

I suggest another possibility. I know that there are hundreds of thousands of voters whose philosophy is conservative yet who have felt betrayed by the GOP in some significant way in the recent past. I need mention only a few of these ways, chiefly spending, immigration (ha!), and gov't "mission creep" (No Child Left Behind, Rx program, etc ad naseum).

Although I have sent contributions to individual candidates, I have pointedly told telephone solicitors for the GOP that I will not contribute to the party until they once again show that conservative values mean something to them. This is from a local precinct chairman.

If I have done this, imagine the throng of disaffected party members who will vote GOP, especially against Billary, but whose enthusiasm for making contributions has been rewarded by disrespect and/or neglect, and are thus saying "Fine, but not with a check from me..!"