4th quarter fundraising #s

[Likely Voter]

It's noteworthy that Bush hasn't announced any numbers yet. They came in 2nd last quarter and actually announced on September 30th.  I think they are waiting to see Rubio's number. 

[EliteLX]

"disingenuous broad"

I know it's fashionable for Atlas posters to hate women, but the sexism in this place is getting pretty ridiculous.

Oh my goodness, you aren't serious.

Disingenuous: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful
Literally every virtue that can be tied to Hillary.

Broad: An early 20th century slang term used in a critical fashion towards a girl someone usually wouldn't like.. usually a "liar" or a "cheater", .etc. Also popular around Italian Americans & such for attraction.

In this context, she qualifies for both. It isn't offensive to anybody but Rachel Maddow. Anything else that offends you?

[Maxwell]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

[Sorenroy]

"disingenuous broad"

I know it's fashionable for Atlas posters to hate women, but the sexism in this place is getting pretty ridiculous.

Oh my goodness, you aren't serious.

Disingenuous: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful
Literally every virtue that can be tied to Hillary.

Broad: An early 20th century slang term used in a critical fashion towards a girl someone usually wouldn't like.. usually a "liar" or a "cheater", .etc. Also popular around Italian Americans & such for attraction.

In this context, she qualifies for both. It isn't offensive to anybody but Rachel Maddow. Anything else that offends you?

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

Same with the word gay. Even though it does in fact mean "happy and cairfree" it has become synonomous with being homosexual. For example, when someone in school calls another student "gay", the teacher isn't going to say "Well, he probably just meant it in the sense of him feeling happy."

[EliteLX]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

We both know you are sniffing out something to be offended or upset about.

It truly is not that deep, nor do you actually care apart from your political motivations telling you to care. If you find the insult "disingenuous broad" against a old female political figure seen as extremely shady and ridiculous to be the same as calling Hillary Clinton as "useless slut" then I highly recommend you don't walk into the real world.

[Sorenroy]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

We both know you are sniffing out something to be offended or upset about.

It truly is not that deep, nor do you actually care outside of political world.

You would not call your mother a "broad" after loosing to her in a board game. It means much more than "liar" or "cheater".

[EliteLX]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

We both know you are sniffing out something to be offended or upset about.

It truly is not that deep, nor do you actually care outside of political world.

You would not call your mother a "broad" after loosing to her in a board game. It means much more than "liar" or "cheater".

I was using an example of it in context. No, I wouldn't call my mother a broad because I have no reason to. It's not offensive, get the hell over it.

If it is offensive you must be boarded up in your room all day maintaining eye contact with rainbow posters. It's also commonly used against somebody that someone has a "grudge" against who is female in gender. If things like this hurt your feelings (We both know they don't, Tumblr & MSNBC tells you it should hurt your feelings, but nobody truly cares because humans realistically knows what's offensive or not. Just want to divide society further with more us vs them & victim mentality.) you must of never been to the bar with a couple of your buddies or been in the real world, and I have no sense continuing this so-called argument.

[The Other Castro]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

We both know you are sniffing out something to be offended or upset about.

It truly is not that deep, nor do you actually care outside of political world.

You would not call your mother a "broad" after loosing to her in a board game. It means much more than "liar" or "cheater".

I was using an example of it in context. No, I wouldn't call my mother a broad because I have no reason to. It's not offensive, get the hell over it.

If it is offensive you must be boarded up in your room all day maintaining eye contact with rainbow posters. It's also commonly used against somebody that someone has a "grudge" against who is female in gender. If things like this hurt your feelings (we both know they don't, Tumblr tells you it should hurt your feelings) you must of never been to the bar with a couple of your buddies or been in the real world, and I have no sense continuing this so-called argument.

Using terms like broad, regardless of how inoffensive you think it may be, is not a good idea because it makes your language sound childish and stupid, and weakens whatever points or arguments you're trying to make. Attacking people for finding certain words inappropriate for political discussion certainly won't help your case either.

[EliteLX]

Broad is a term used similarly to "whore", "slut", "skank", "witch", ect, other terms used to put down women and only women to snipe at their character by pointing at their sexual activity. Show some respect for once in your life.

We both know you are sniffing out something to be offended or upset about.

It truly is not that deep, nor do you actually care outside of political world.

You would not call your mother a "broad" after loosing to her in a board game. It means much more than "liar" or "cheater".

I was using an example of it in context. No, I wouldn't call my mother a broad because I have no reason to. It's not offensive, get the hell over it.

If it is offensive you must be boarded up in your room all day maintaining eye contact with rainbow posters. It's also commonly used against somebody that someone has a "grudge" against who is female in gender. If things like this hurt your feelings (we both know they don't, Tumblr tells you it should hurt your feelings) you must of never been to the bar with a couple of your buddies or been in the real world, and I have no sense continuing this so-called argument.

Using terms like broad, regardless of how inoffensive you think it may be, is not a good idea because it makes your language sound childish and stupid, and weakens whatever points or arguments you're trying to make. Attacking people for finding certain words inappropriate for political discussion certainly won't help your case either.

I'm most certainly not going to apologize to a bunch of grown men & woman for using a casual insult that is gender-based against an old female politician seen as deceitful, apologies if it makes the point weaker.

Let's move on, definitely a ridiculous thing to argue about.

[Likely Voter]

Let's return to the topic subject please

[The Other Castro]

Any idea when SuperPacs will start reporting their numbers?

[cinyc]

33 Mio. $ is not that bad, especially because you basically don't need any money for IA, NH, NV and SC.

The Boston broadcast TV media market, which you have to buy to reach most of New Hampshire during the local newscasts and such when most campaigns like to buy ads, isn't exactly cheap.  And even Iowa can get pricey because it's split between TV markets, some of which are somewhat inefficient (Omaha, Quad Cities) because they include a lot of out-of-state residents. 

I was looking at the ad rates some Republican campaigns were charged in the Des Moines market today.  It was not uncommon for some ads during prime newscasts and prime time to cost low four figures.  Those add up quickly so that you're easily spending over $10,000 per station per week.  Multiply that by four network stations and five or six Iowa media markets, and you're burning through a lot of cash on broadcast TV advertising alone.  That's before cable buys, radio buys, etc.

[Maxwell]

Not to mention cinyc, that TV stations get to price gouge Super PAC's, which some campaigns will be especially dependent on.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Not to mention cinyc, that TV stations get to price gouge Super PAC's, which some campaigns will be especially dependent on.

Yes, the campaigns get advantages with ads. Imagine if Trump gave himself a billion dollars. He'd have a huge advantage. Note that the Millionaire's Amendment, which had a remedy for this situation,  was struck down by SCOTUS.

[Adam Griffin]

94% of Clinton's donations were $100 or less and 60% were from women. Pretty impressive.

Could you provide a link? I'm not saying I doubt it, I just want to know the site. Also, now that Sander's numbers are out, what did those look like (how many were men/women, how many were below x amount)? I looked around but couldn't find anything.

That's not unbelievable. However, make sure you understand what is being said: that 94% of the individual contributions made were $100 or less, not that 94% of the money raised came in the form of contributions of $100 or less.

I'm not sure if any more information is available as of now, but a likely scenario (comparable to past quarters) is that approximately $30 million of Clinton's $37 million haul came from that other 6% of (mostly max) contributions, while the remaining $7 million came from those 94% of contributions that were $100 or less.

However, since Clinton got most of the loyal foot-soldiers to max out in Q2 & Q3, it's possible that the percentage of her money coming from large contributions has dropped to a degree since then (maybe it's only 70% now, or something comparable).

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

94% of Clinton's donations were $100 or less and 60% were from women. Pretty impressive.

Could you provide a link? I'm not saying I doubt it, I just want to know the site. Also, now that Sander's numbers are out, what did those look like (how many were men/women, how many were below x amount)? I looked around but couldn't find anything.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/01/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising-100-million/index.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/hillary-clinton-fundraising-totals-2015-217284

Towards the bottom in both articles.

[Sorenroy]

94% of Clinton's donations were $100 or less and 60% were from women. Pretty impressive.

Could you provide a link? I'm not saying I doubt it, I just want to know the site. Also, now that Sander's numbers are out, what did those look like (how many were men/women, how many were below x amount)? I looked around but couldn't find anything.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/01/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising-100-million/index.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/hillary-clinton-fundraising-totals-2015-217284

Towards the bottom in both articles.

Thanks, do you know when/if the Sander's campaign released an similar breakdown for their numbers? I didn't see anything when I looked around a couple of days ago, but it seems like you know where to find these sorts of things.

[Likely Voter]

Well the first news day of the year has passed and no one besides what we can assume are the top 2 for each side (Clinton/Sanders and Carson/Cruz) have released anything. So I guess that means that none of the other campaigns has anything to celebrate money-wise. Seems that if Rubio or Bush had more than either Cruz or Carson, we would have heard about it by now. So will we have to wait until the 15th? Hopefully some dribs and drabs come out before then.

As for the Super PACs, I believe they have until the 30th to disclose. But we may get some leaks before then.

[bigedlb]

What is the wild card is Trump who uses his own cash and has just a few $ from small donors.

[Lief 🗽]

Well the first news day of the year has passed and no one besides what we can assume are the top 2 for each side (Clinton/Sanders and Carson/Cruz) have released anything. So I guess that means that none of the other campaigns has anything to celebrate money-wise. Seems that if Rubio or Bush had more than either Cruz or Carson, we would have heard about it by now. So will we have to wait until the 15th? Hopefully some dribs and drabs come out before then.

As for the Super PACs, I believe they have until the 30th to disclose. But we may get some leaks before then.

I get the feeling that Rubio's haul is going to be particularly embarrassing.

[Ebsy]

What loser would donate to the presidential campaign of Marco "New American Century" Rubio?

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

I'm guessing that O'Malley's numbers will be something in the neighborhood of $3 million.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

94% of Clinton's donations were $100 or less and 60% were from women. Pretty impressive.

Could you provide a link? I'm not saying I doubt it, I just want to know the site. Also, now that Sander's numbers are out, what did those look like (how many were men/women, how many were below x amount)? I looked around but couldn't find anything.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/01/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising-100-million/index.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/hillary-clinton-fundraising-totals-2015-217284

Towards the bottom in both articles.

They had similar numbers in the past, but 64% of her money was from maxed out donors.

[Gustaf]

FTR, Maxwell is correct about misogynist language. Gendered slurs, even when relatively mild, are there for a reason.

So is 15th the deadline when they have to report numbers?

[Tender Branson]

FTR, Maxwell is correct about misogynist language. Gendered slurs, even when relatively mild, are there for a reason.

So is 15th the deadline when they have to report numbers?

No, the 31st.