final 1st quarter fundraising predictions from The Hotline

[Deano963]

These figures do not include transfers from other accounts or from the final quarter of '06.

Wow. So Hillary Clinton's projected fundraising of $23 - $28 million dosen't even include the $11 million she transferred from her Senate account? Damn - that means she will have raised between $34 and $39 million.

im predicting chris dodd raised $100 or so.

Yeh....as Chairman of the uber-powerful Banking Committee, absolutley no one wants to give him any money . He'll probably raise $8-$9 million.

[Deano963]

i tried to tell you all romney is a serious candidate.

You honestly believe that the ability to raise a lot of money by maxing out a lot of big-dollar donors in one quarter makes one a serious candidate?

Wow.

Maybe after I hear Romney actually take a position an ANYTHING WHATSOEVER, and then maybe 6 months later if he has managed to not completely flip-flop his position on said issue, I will regard him as a serious candidate.

[Deano963]

romney absolutely is a serious candidate.  ive always predicted him to be the nominee and i stand by that prediction.  ( i do not support romney, in fact, im not a big romney fan at all)

Well, you also predicted that Kerry Healey would beat Deval Patrick, and she ended up getting her ass handed to her. So don't take it personally when I say I don't put too much stock in your predictions.

this isnt a good day for the dodd campaign.  so much for that 7-9 million estimate.

Well, he raised $4 million and transferred $5 million from his Senate account for a total of $9 million, so he did raise $9 million if you count the transfer. Either way, it's sure a heck of a lot more than the $100 you predicted he would raise.

[Deano963]

facetious: 
1.   not meant to be taken seriously or literally:

As in your election predictions? Duly noted.

[Deano963]

A couple more days until Obama's numbers come out. I think they will be big.

It would be so awesome if he raised more than Clinton.

[Deano963]

Oh look - the cute little troll who pretends to be a Democrat is back.

[Deano963]

Oh look - the cute little troll who pretends to be a Democrat is back.

Beano69,

fine then.  i'm an independent. 

Well, at least I finally got you stop lying about your party ID.

Now if only I could force some sense into that tiny, ignorant head of yours........

I wont get my hopes up. I'm not a miracle worker.

[Deano963]

Oh look - the cute little troll who pretends to be a Democrat is back.

  my first ever vote I cast for Kerry in 2004 and then Jim Webb in 2006,

LOL liar. What a frickin liar.

 but if the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate your man Hillary and if you're delusional enough to think he has a chance, then knock yourselves out and nominate him.   I'll just vote Independent.

"My" man Hillary. When did I ever say I was for Hillary? Fact is that I never did. The fact that you can't argue with me w/out making sh**t up and putting words in my mouth only reinforces my belief that you area troll and an idiot to boot. Not an ounce of intelligence in any of your idiotic rants.

Maybe I will begin to take you serisouly when you can say one single thing w/out putting words in my mouth that I never siad.

I suspect you do this b/c you can't argue with me based on that facts b/c you know I am right .

and if Im such a troll, then ignore me, don't respond.  Why do you make such an effort to go out of your way and post angry, wild-eyed hysterical rantings claiming I'm Karl Rove and a Republican in disguise? 

Wow - again, you make up crazy sh**t that I never said. Never accused you of being Karl Rove. Only someone as dimwitted as you would even think up something so stupid.

my guess is that you know I'm right and you secretly realize that the situation is not good for the Democrats and you're going to lose the White House (again) in 2008 because of the long history of nominating crappy candidates

LOL! My God you are dumb. You may not be a troll, but if you really do believe half of the sh**t you say (like when you say that things are not good for the Democrats right now), then you are unbelievably stupid.
If you really think that the current political situation is not good for the Democrats right now, you must have been asleep for the past five months, or delusional. The only thing I have ever heard that is even dumber is the suggestion that Mitt Romney would easily beat any of the Democratic candidates in the General Election.


After multiple warnings with regard to not posting such personal attacks, this is the kind of post that gets one banned ... - Dave

[Deano963]

Can someone explain to me what donors see in Romney? Were I a Republican, I'd invest my money in either Giuliani or Thompson, assuming the latter runs.

Well, one thing that should be noted about Romney is that he only had 30,00 donors (McCain, who only raised 12.5 million, had 60,00 donors). That really is quite pathetic, and what it likely means is that all he did was get a lot of rich, mega-donors to max out for both the primary and the general election already.

Romney remains a pathetically weak candidate who did nothing but put on a show for a quarter. He may be able to keep it up for one more quarter, but no more. He has no small donor base, and is very unlikely to develop one as his GOP primary opponents start to point to his monumental flip-flops and poor record.