State by State Fund Raising Maps
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:39:15 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
  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  State by State Fund Raising Maps
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: State by State Fund Raising Maps  (Read 2196 times)
sethm0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 304


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 03, 2007, 09:28:52 PM »


 The fund raising leaders in each state, combined Republican and Democrat:

       


 Among just Republicans:

       


Among just Democrats:

       
Logged
sethm0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 304


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2007, 09:37:15 PM »


 A few disclaimers and interesting points:

 * All of these numbers are from opensecrets.org, and only include donations above $200. Thus, while these maps do not represent small "grassroots" donations, they do give an indication of where major donors and political elites are leaning in each state - people who still have great influence.

 * These maps underscore how impressive Mitt Romney's fund raising efforts are. Not only is he raising a lot of money - he is doing it across a wide geographic base.

 * Hillary Clinton leads fund raising in fewer states than Romney or Obama, but she does lead fund raising in several of the "big money" states. New York, California and Florida are the 1st, 2nd and 4th largest donor states to campaigns overall so far this year.

 * I think that the Obama campaign is the source of the most surprises - who would think he would lead fund raising in Oklahoma, Kentucky and Colorado - even out-raising all Republicans in those states?
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2007, 12:01:32 AM »

Did you double-check these numbers at the FEC website?
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2007, 12:11:42 AM »

In terms of Democratic primary money, Hillary does well in the big states, taking all of the dozen biggest except for OH (7th), GA (9th), and her opponents IL (5th) and NC (10th). Conversely, of the smallest dozen, Obama is only not leading in RI and DE. Edwards does best in the south.

Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2007, 02:56:47 AM »

Is there a D vs. R map?
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2007, 06:13:01 AM »


Yepp.

Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2007, 06:19:20 AM »

Interesting that the Republicans raised more in NH than the Democrats and that Hillary Clinton isn´t doing better in Arkansas. WI is also strange, Obama gets most there but all other Democrats not, so the Republicans are ahead even though Tommy Thompson isn´t doing well there. MI is Romney-land and MO is a tossup. TX is also not a bad state for Democrats.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2007, 04:08:33 PM »

Very interesting stuff. Thanks sethm0.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2007, 08:45:30 PM »

In terms of delegates, this would translate to:

Romney: 1102
Giuliani: 887
McCain: 358
Favorite Sons / US Territories: 172


Clinton: 2368 (*majority*)  [essentially, due to her slim lead over Obama in California]
Obama: 1234
Edwards: 539
Favorite Sons / US Territories: 219
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 08, 2007, 09:02:56 PM »

Nice work, sethm0.  I observed that all except Giuliani leads in his/her home state.  When segregated by party affiliation, all lead in his/her home state.  And in particular, Huckabee, Biden, Tompson, Brownback, Dodd, and Richardson only lead in their home states.  I don't know what that might mean, except that polling data and fundraising trends seem to tell the same story.  Money talks.  I guess the only surprise, for me, was that Clinton is ahead of Obama in big donations in California.  I always read in TIME about how the hollywood set just loves the B-man.  Maybe the C-word does well enough in the northern half of the state to compensate.
Logged
Erc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,823
Slovenia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2007, 06:44:58 PM »

Nice work, sethm0.  I observed that all except Giuliani leads in his/her home state.  When segregated by party affiliation, all lead in his/her home state.  And in particular, Huckabee, Biden, Tompson, Brownback, Dodd, and Richardson only lead in their home states.  I don't know what that might mean, except that polling data and fundraising trends seem to tell the same story.  Money talks.  I guess the only surprise, for me, was that Clinton is ahead of Obama in big donations in California.  I always read in TIME about how the hollywood set just loves the B-man.  Maybe the C-word does well enough in the northern half of the state to compensate.

Clinton's lead (amongst all donations) is hardly impressive...only about 200k in a state where both candidates have raised over $8m.

Of money raised for Democrats in CA:
Clinton: 38.0%
Obama: 37.1%
Edwards: 14.6%
Richardson: 6.1%
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2007, 09:11:15 PM »

Clinton's lead (amongst all donations) is hardly impressive...only about 200k in a state where both candidates have raised over $8m.

Of money raised for Democrats in CA:
Clinton: 38.0%
Obama: 37.1%
Edwards: 14.6%
Richardson: 6.1%


ah, thanks for the clarification.  still, a lead's a lead.  I'd still venture a guess that if you had a good breakdown with comparisons for the two major populated pieces of that largely empty state, my guess is that you'd find LA/Orange/Riverside/SanBernadino/Ventura county donors giving their hard-won cash to Obama and SF/SanMateo/Alameda/SantaClara/Marin counties giving theirs to clinton.  That's just my BS estimate, I admit.  Or a hunch.  Anyone have that data on the ready?
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 #12 on: August 10, 2007, 07:23:36 PM »
« Edited: August 10, 2007, 07:25:07 PM by Verily »

In terms of delegates, this would translate to:

Romney: 1102
Giuliani: 887
McCain: 358
Favorite Sons / US Territories: 172


Clinton: 2368 (*majority*)  [essentially, due to her slim lead over Obama in California]
Obama: 1234
Edwards: 539
Favorite Sons / US Territories: 219

Are you using the 15% threshold for proportionality the Democrats use? A slim lead of one candidate over another should make little to no difference in the Democratic primary.
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 10, 2007, 08:01:27 PM »

Clinton's lead (amongst all donations) is hardly impressive...only about 200k in a state where both candidates have raised over $8m.

Of money raised for Democrats in CA:
Clinton: 38.0%
Obama: 37.1%
Edwards: 14.6%
Richardson: 6.1%


ah, thanks for the clarification.  still, a lead's a lead.  I'd still venture a guess that if you had a good breakdown with comparisons for the two major populated pieces of that largely empty state, my guess is that you'd find LA/Orange/Riverside/SanBernadino/Ventura county donors giving their hard-won cash to Obama and SF/SanMateo/Alameda/SantaClara/Marin counties giving theirs to clinton.  That's just my BS estimate, I admit.  Or a hunch.  Anyone have that data on the ready?

That would be my guess as well although I don't have the data on it either.
Logged
sethm0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 304


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 10, 2007, 09:54:06 PM »


 Does anyone have an explanation for why Dems do so well in the deep south? Does it mean the wealthy elite there is slower to change political views than voters as a whole? That would also explain New Hampshire, in reverse.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« 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 0.05 seconds with 15 queries.