Comments on: Is Obama Having Fundraising Problems ?

By: Jeebus

Jeebus — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:17:36 +0000

August = $66 million plus 500,000 new contributors.

It seems the narrative of BHO’s failure is more interesting than the fact of his success.

By: Bob Aman

Bob Aman — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:13:20 +0000

ChiChi:

The way it works typically, is that you can donate online, and the donation goes through, but it triggers a refund when the background check demonstrates they aren’t citizens.

By: ChiChi

ChiChi — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 04:46:21 +0000

If Obama is running short on his campaign financing, he can always take another trip to Europe and get them fired up and beg from them. They are responsible for huge amounts of campaign funds raised under the reportable amount. I know everybody say no he can’t do that, that is illegal. WAKE UP AMERICA! I personally know about a hundred or so Europeans who have donated online, braged about it and each knows hundreds more that have donated. So where there are a few hundred, we know there must be a few thousand or even a million.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:01:33 +0000

If he hadn’t “opted out” of defending the Fourth Amendment, he’d still be getting $40/month from me.

Instead, it’s going to the ACLU, the EFF, and AcoutabilityNowPAC.

By: mw

mw — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:45:24 +0000

Doug,
I can certainly understand that McCain is doing better than expected with his game changing move last week and the resulting enthusiasm generated among his supporters. Since they were caught flat-footed, it might have raised the bar on what the Obama campaign now thinks they need to raise.

But I don’t understand why there would be “diminished enthusiasm on the Demcoratic side”. Casual observation is that they seem just as ~~worshipful~~ enthusiastic as ever. Not sure if believe the NYT reporting there. Unless it is an effect of having the “inevitability” bubble burst.

Anyway, I expect the campaign regrets spending all that money on having a Romney-centric attack campaign already produced, qued up and ready to roll.

By: kranky kritter

kranky kritter — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:20:47 +0000

If this is true, then it sure deserves to be filed under “brought that shit upon himself” doesn’t it? Obama played the virtue card with his early pledge to play by the rules, and then made the predictable and seemingly crafty but obviously self-serving decision to opt out and try to spin away his lack of fealty to what was heretofore a predictable liberal principle.

So if it bites him in the arse, he can’t blame anyone else. However, there might be some comedy value in watching his partisans now claim “no fair.”

By: Jimmy the Dhimmi

Jimmy the Dhimmi — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:14:07 +0000

Consider this new reversal from Barack Obama:

after a year of telling donors not to contribute to 527 groups, of encouraging strategists not to form them and of suggesting that outside messaging efforts would not be welcome in Obama’s Democratic Party, Obama’s strategists have changed their approach…Obama’s campaign will no longer object to independent efforts that hammer John McCain

Just as Barack once pledged he would recieve public financing, and that he would not take soft money from lobbyists, he also rallied against 527’s. Well, the anointed purveyor of “New Politics(TM)” reversed his position on campaign ethics once again in order to suit his desire to win the white house in ‘08.

Change!!!

By: Dyre42

Dyre42 — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:42:29 +0000

He raised between 8 to 10 million dollars in a single day last week

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Palin_raising_for_Obama_.html?showall

(after Plain’s speech) I don’t think he’s doing that badly.

By: Gaucho Politico

Gaucho Politico — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:14:43 +0000

Obama will still out raise McCain. The question is whether he out raises both McCain and the RNC. that was always going to be a tall order and public financing was not going to do it. Parity would be enough.

By: Macro Excel Macros

Macro Excel Macros — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:14:25 +0000

Keep believing your bad logic. Your assumptions are flawed.
Fighting terrorists in Iraq requires strike teams, and good intelligence. It does not require occupation.

A strong government in Iraq is the best response to Iranian influence. The surge did not accomplish this. I believe that only the threat of leaving will cause the necessary political reconciliation needed to strengthen and stabilize Iraq against Iranian influence.

Our occupation only serves to recruit new terrorists against the United States.

Moreover, ending our dependence on the products of the middle east may also be an effective tactic. The less we meddle in their affairs to pursue our oil interests, the less we stay on their minds.

Your assumptions are incorrect, thus while the form of your logic is correct, your argument is truly a house of cards.

By: mike mcEachran

mike mcEachran — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:03:44 +0000

One problem is sheer exhaustion. Isn’t this damn thing over yet?