Guess how much Obama raised in September
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 06:02:55 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Guess how much Obama raised in September
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Guess how much Obama raised in September  (Read 3126 times)
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 19, 2008, 01:36:32 PM »

I just cannot figure out why they didn't announce it in early October.

Because it would have been a stupid move. It would have been more difficult to convince people to continue to donate if the campaign appeared to be way ahead in cash, and it would have been a waste of a news cycle at a time when Obama was already far ahead. Much, much more intelligent to save it for right now, to put in the nail in the coffin after the final debate (combined with the Powell endorsement).

Of course, McCain should have waited with Ayers and ACORN stuff until after the final debate, too. Then Obama wouldn't have had free public face time with the country to address the issue as eloquently and convincingly as he did in the final debate.

You're right about the day, but it can't always be helped.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 19, 2008, 01:50:00 PM »

I just cannot figure out why they didn't announce it in early October.

Because it would have been a stupid move. It would have been more difficult to convince people to continue to donate if the campaign appeared to be way ahead in cash, and it would have been a waste of a news cycle at a time when Obama was already far ahead. Much, much more intelligent to save it for right now, to put in the nail in the coffin after the final debate (combined with the Powell endorsement).

Of course, McCain should have waited with Ayers and ACORN stuff until after the final debate, too. Then Obama wouldn't have had free public face time with the country to address the issue as eloquently and convincingly as he did in the final debate.

You're right about the day, but it can't always be helped.

Verily, two things that can really make people think Obama can win before the election.

1.   Great poll numbers (which Obama can't really do anything about). 

2.   Raising a lot of money.  Putting it out there two weeks ago would have made him look inevitable.

ACORN is still out there.  Ayers isn't that relevant, to me at least (though Obama could have handled that a lot better, even in the primaries).
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 19, 2008, 01:52:18 PM »

I just cannot figure out why they didn't announce it in early October.

Because it would have been a stupid move. It would have been more difficult to convince people to continue to donate if the campaign appeared to be way ahead in cash, and it would have been a waste of a news cycle at a time when Obama was already far ahead. Much, much more intelligent to save it for right now, to put in the nail in the coffin after the final debate (combined with the Powell endorsement).

Of course, McCain should have waited with Ayers and ACORN stuff until after the final debate, too. Then Obama wouldn't have had free public face time with the country to address the issue as eloquently and convincingly as he did in the final debate.

You're right about the day, but it can't always be helped.

Verily, two things that can really make people think Obama can win before the election.

1.   Great poll numbers (which Obama can't really do anything about). 

2.   Raising a lot of money.  Putting it out there two weeks ago would have made him look inevitable.

ACORN is still out there.  Ayers isn't that relevant, to me at least (though Obama could have handled that a lot better, even in the primaries).

But inevitability is not useful. In fact, it actively hurts a campaign to be seen as inevitable.  It only makes the media more excited every time the opposition strikes a blow. If Clinton were not inevitable, "drivers' licenses for illegals" would have been nothing more than a minor gaffe. If Giuliani were not inevitable, a poor finish in Iowa would have been irrelevant.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,932


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 19, 2008, 01:55:38 PM »

But inevitability is not useful. In fact, it actively hurts a campaign to be seen as inevitable.  It only makes the media more excited every time the opposition strikes a blow. If Clinton were not inevitable, "drivers' licenses for illegals" would have been nothing more than a minor gaffe. If Giuliani were not inevitable, a poor finish in Iowa would have been irrelevant.

Yes. At this point, announcing how much money you've raised becomes a mixed bag rather than a pure advantage, because Obama now has more money than he can possibly spend effectively in swing states and will do better by getting people to support him because they like him and not because the media says he can be competitive with McCain. He is competitive, full stop.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 19, 2008, 02:12:03 PM »

He has parity, but I still can't figure out why Obama didn't announce it earlier.  A Sunday morning with Powell's endorsement isn't exactly good timing.

J.J., perhaps - perhaps - the people running the Obama campaign are smarter than you when it comes to stuff like this. I know none of them are in MENSA, but they've proven themselves to be pretty capable thus far.

An absolutely great Obama story gets released on a Sunday morning, where it's completely hidden by the Powell story.  The roll out of Biden wasn't handled well, if you recall.  This would have had so much more impact if it was released on Thursday or Friday, not to mention 2 weeks ago.

J.J., you seem to be under the impression that success in a campaign means winning the greatest number of news cycles. Sure it's important, but basing your entire strategy around winning days of media coverage is a myopic stategy. You can win a news cycle but lose ground overall, for instance if the cycle was 'won' on ephemeral issues like Joe Biden's hair plugs or McCain's performance on SNL.

It's been written somewhere (I'm afraid I can't remember where so I can't provide a link) that this strategy of aggressively trying to win each media cycle was one of the fundamental principles of McCain's campaign. That's why when he was still riding high in early September you had a flurry of announcements and why, later on when McCain began to falter, his campaign resorted to high-intensity gimmicks to recapture the spotlight. This focus, however, has backfired somewhat as McCain could not effectively mold the narrative and the constant quest for attention made him seem erratic and desperate.

I will admit that it would have been nice for Obama if he'd spaced out these announcements by a couple of days, but I'm not sure it would have been better than having them both at once. Obama will start the week with very good news and possibly a bump in the polls a few days later when the overnights and 3-day returns come in around midweek. This timing wasn't bad strategy, it was just not what you expected.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2008, 02:24:29 PM »


J.J., you seem to be under the impression that success in a campaign means winning the greatest number of news cycles. Sure it's important, but basing your entire strategy around winning days of media coverage is a myopic stategy. You can win a news cycle but lose ground overall, for instance if the cycle was 'won' on ephemeral issues like Joe Biden's hair plugs or McCain's performance on SNL.



I am saying that this is a great story that makes the candidate look like the winner; it would help give Obama an aura of invulnerability, if it is announced.  It helps with fund raising (like poll numbers) because people will contribute more to a candidate they think will win.  And, it adds that one day cycle of good news, though that is the least important reason.

It would have been like getting Powell's endorsement in early September and sitting on it until now.
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2008, 02:32:28 PM »

Here are the numbers:



Roughtly, this is how the campaigns started on 9/1/08:

RNC:                     $113,000,000

80% McCain:           $90,000,000

McCain FEC:             $84,000,000

Total:                      $174,000,000

Obama/DNC:             $85,000,000

Difference:               $89,000,000

The RNC raised 9/08: $66,000,000

80% McCain:              $52,800, 000

Total, less spending:  $221,800,000

Obama:                      $150,000,000

DNC:                            $42,000,000

80% Obama:                $33,600,000

Total, less spending:  $183,800,000

Total, less spending:  $85,000,000 + $183,800,000 = 268,000,000


Now, I've underestimated McCain's total because $20-$40 M was transferred to other committees and overestimated the the DNC start by about $2 M.

He has parity, but I still can't figure out why Obama didn't announce it earlier.  A Sunday morning with Powell's endorsement isn't exactly good timing.

1.  He wants the gravy train to keep on running.  The less his supporters hear about this, the harder they will campaign and the more they will continue to give their money.


2.  You still don't understand what that 80% is talking about and you still assume that the RNC is giving all of its money for McCain and the DNC for Obama.  If you're going to pitch this as an overall battle between the GOP and Democrats, then screw it, why not including the other committees and individual senatorial candidates too?  Oh, right, because you like to skew the numbers, nevermind.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 19, 2008, 02:38:36 PM »

He has parity, but I still can't figure out why Obama didn't announce it earlier.  A Sunday morning with Powell's endorsement isn't exactly good timing.

For the same reasons 'bumper' months/periods are announced unusually late in the UK; because it takes time to verify and return unwanted or unnacountable donations.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 19, 2008, 02:54:00 PM »

Here are the numbers:



Roughtly, this is how the campaigns started on 9/1/08:

RNC:                     $113,000,000

80% McCain:           $90,000,000

McCain FEC:             $84,000,000

Total:                      $174,000,000

Obama/DNC:             $85,000,000

Difference:               $89,000,000

The RNC raised 9/08: $66,000,000

80% McCain:              $52,800, 000

Total, less spending:  $221,800,000

Obama:                      $150,000,000

DNC:                            $42,000,000

80% Obama:                $33,600,000

Total, less spending:  $183,800,000

Total, less spending:  $85,000,000 + $183,800,000 = 268,000,000


Now, I've underestimated McCain's total because $20-$40 M was transferred to other committees and overestimated the the DNC start by about $2 M.

He has parity, but I still can't figure out why Obama didn't announce it earlier.  A Sunday morning with Powell's endorsement isn't exactly good timing.

1.  He wants the gravy train to keep on running.  The less his supporters hear about this, the harder they will campaign and the more they will continue to give their money.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I took a look at the last cycle; about 10% was given to Congressional candidates on both sides.  The Volon suggest that for every $1.00, 80 cents would be "campaign money, so that's what I'm using.

He has parity, but I still can't figure out why Obama didn't announce it earlier.  A Sunday morning with Powell's endorsement isn't exactly good timing.


For the same reasons 'bumper' months/periods are announced unusually late in the UK; because it takes time to verify and return unwanted or unnacountable donations.


I agree that they can't come up with perfect numbers, but both sides have, in the past, come out with rough estimates.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 19, 2008, 02:58:11 PM »

JJ you have been prespinning that Obama is in trouble and had to borrow

now you are spinning that he is still behind on money

if these things are true, then why is Obama outspending McCain/RNC by 3-1 or more. And isn't that all that matters.
Logged
Firefly
Rookie
**
Posts: 248
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 19, 2008, 08:16:46 PM »

JJ you have been prespinning that Obama is in trouble and had to borrow

now you are spinning that he is still behind on money

if these things are true, then why is Obama outspending McCain/RNC by 3-1 or more. And isn't that all that matters.

rofl@J.J.  Just eat your crow and get it over with.  You're just making yourself look even more hackish than you really are.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.226 seconds with 13 queries.