Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in March

Newsweek's Romano thinks Hillary may have raised only $7 million in primary--as opposed to general-election--funds last month, and concludes (reasonably, I think) that any primary endgame may have less to do with a superdelegate swarm or a Dean-Pelosi-Reid-Gore poobah intervention than possible bankruptcy:

As the clock ticks down, Clinton will have fewer chances to gain delegates and votes, and Obama will appear more and more inevitable. Wins in Indiana and North Carolina on May 6--hardly a sure thing, but possible--would only accelerate that process. All of which is to say that if Obama "looks like the nominee" at some point before the convention, Clinton's financial intake may flatline. In that case, she probably won't have the rainy-day money necessary to keep fighting (unless it's more of her own). Meaning that it

http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stump er/archive/2008/04/03/could-money-woes-e ventually-force-clinton-from-the-race.as px



Display:


Re: Hillary only raised $7 million in March (1.42 / 7)

But I thought Barack was dropping out tomorrow because he couldnt win????? Or wait, he was going to be become the VP for Clinton because she was the real winnner. Oh wait, Obamas donations are from all the rich people, but Clinton donations are larger.

Oh wait, I thought we were grass roots, your telling me we arent really raising anywhere near the amounts of the guy who is about to drop out?

Uh Oh!


by hillaryfor2008 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:46:08 AM EST

Re: Hillary only raised $7 million in March (2.00 / 0)

Err. Your post made little, if any, sense. Sorry.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:47:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in Marc (2.00 / 0)

She'd almost double that if she forgave her campaign her $5 million loan. Wonder if she'll do that, or if she'll make all of her supporters pay her back that $5 million.

This definitely presents a problem for Clinton. If she doesn't get the nomination, and she wants to raise more money in a few years for another Senate run, it's going to make it extremely difficult. She still has the Clinton name recognition behind her; it's been her biggest asset so far this race. We'll have to see how much this'll end up mattering.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:46:49 AM EST

KathyM (2.00 / 6)

Wow lady, you really need to get a life.  This kinda of vitriol will get your candidate exactly nowhere in the fall.  Win or lose the nomination, you need every last Clinton voter in order to even have a slim chance of winning the election (check the polls my friend, Obama is behind McCain).  If you're so confident that Obama will win, why not start trying to bring everyone together?  Or do you need to start looking for the next person to hate?  Seems kinda like a Right Wing personality to me- always looking for someone to hate rather that someone to love.  Where are your Pro-Obama diaries?  Try that, it would be much more attractive than the Anti-Clinton ones.  
Silly people, you may win the nomination, but you attack Clinton at your own peril.  Remember, Hillary has one over 13 million votes so far.  Guess how many Obama has won?  Just over 13 million.  Less than 1% differentiates them.  
Try to unite not divide, that's all I'm sayin....
by easyE on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:58:58 AM EST

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 2)

EasyE, those are excellent sentiments, and I support them wholeheartedly, as I am sure many others do. As for the diarist, i fear you are talking to a troll. We need to remember if it walks like a troll, and talks like a troll, and smells like a troll, well you know the rest.


The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson
by pollbuster on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:04:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 0)

Looking at this person's diaries and comments, it is clear they are an active member on this site.  I think just because this diary is critical of Clinton does not make it a troll diary.  This person is an Obama partisan like many people on this site are Clinton partisans.  Likewise, diaries that are critical of Obama are not automatically troll diaries, either.  I think a troll diary is one made by someone not commonly active on this site or containing inflammatory language that is meant to incite people.  This persons claims are controversial, but not inflammatory or containing insults.


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:30:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

So you belive that just as long as someone is active on a site, they can't be a troll, I disagree. You believe that one has to be inflammatory, and insulting to be a troll, I disagree.

This is an individual who has violated the rules of the site on multiple daily postings, and this is an individual, who by his/her postings attempts to sow disunity on this site. Each of his/her postings has the same exact theme, which is to put down one candidate. There is very little actual support seen for his/her supposeed candidate.

Now I don't know what you may believe with regard to the presidential election. Al I know is I would like to see a democrat elected in November. It's nice to win the olympic trials, but it's most important to win the olympic gold.

I don''t see how a continuos attack on one of our candidates will give us the unity to win the gold in November, but, hopefully I am wrong.


The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson
by pollbuster on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:16:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 1)

When was overstating campaign income by a factor of $13million, a vitriol attack? The amount is significant and her finances are deserving of the scrutiny they are getting, especially after inflating the figures as they did last month.


McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future
by KathyM on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:12:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 1)

She is not overstating anything. Romano get it wrong, u get it wrong.

Maybe you can think for yourself: who would give Hillary any money for the general election in March, when the primary victory isn't sure at all?

You should delete the diary.


by eumc on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

Much of the money Clinton has raised can only be used in the general election.  The best source I could find at the moment was from the Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21 /clinton-camp-essentially_n_92839.html
But here, it describes that $21.5 million of what Clinton raised in February is for the general election.  I'm not sure why this is, but I think a person can give a maximum amount for the primary, and then a maximum for the general election.  I could see people doing this as a way of showing support for Clinton.
by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:38:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 2)

Yes, since Jan 2007, she raised some 160+mil $ for the primary and some 20 mil for the general.

But the 20 were not raised in February, that's why this diary is totally false. They were reported in February as distinct from the primary campaign cash on hand

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21 /obama-has-clear-money-adv_n_92861.html


by eumc on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:47:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

OK, this is confusing.  Did she raise $35 million in primary funds in February (including her loan to herself) and then the $20 odd million in general election funds just got reported at the same time in February?  The only site that I could find a summary on is:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index. asp

I'll admit that I didn't look too hard and I'm not sure if this is considered a credible source, but there are claims Clinton has raised $169 million total through the end of March, has spent ~$136 million so far, and has $33 million in cash on hand.  I followed the link you showed me, but I didn't see any total numbers there.  

I'm curious to see a link detailing exactly how much of what she raised is for the general.  Right now I'm guessing she has about $33 million ($20+ million of which she can't touch).  That means $13 million she can use, but with $8-9 million in debt.  can anyone verify this?


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:10:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

There you go, official FEC filling:
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2008/M3/C0 0431569/A_ELECTION_C00431569.html

Of February money, 1 mil is for the general.

Same for Obama:
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2008/M3/C0 0431445/A_ELECTION_C00431445.html

So are the diarist and Romano pathetic or what?


by eumc on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:38:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 1)

Thanks for the links.

I'm an Obama supporter (don't worry, I'll vote for Clinton in she gets the nomination), but, yeah, I am disappointed in the diarist and that blog.  Both were shoddy work.


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:06:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

Do you know what the "No election supplied" means?  Does that mean they can use that money in the primary?


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:08:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 1)

Yes, they sure can.

Maybe that's a good indication of money given online, since as far as I see, neither BO, nor HRC require a declaration of the money destination when donating on their websites.

At fundraisers, I suppose the organizers have two types of receipts, in case the particular donor has already given the primary maximum.


by eumc on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:29:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

Thanks for the info.


by nrioq on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 01:17:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 2)

I've seen your other posts.  Clinton this, Clinton that.  Holy Moly.  Feels like Fox News circa 1998......


by easyE on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:25:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (2.00 / 1)

She doesn't rally care about Obama. She's just a Clinton hater. From the tone of her vitriol, I'm pretty sure she's a Republican who's listened to right-wing talk radio for the last couple of decades. (And I also think she might be rsrai by a new name, which would explain everything.)


by LakersFan on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:11:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

"you really need to get a life.  This kinda of vitriol will get your candidate exactly nowhere in the fall."

So....the excuse for the open spigot of vitriol from Camp Hillary is that she doesn't stand a chance of being a candidate in the fall?


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:13:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: KathyM (none / 0)

Uh, this diary is nearly word-for-word the same as the report cited, so I don't think it betrays any trollishness on the diarist's part.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:16:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

easyE (none / 0)

Be the change you wish to see.


by dystopianfuturetoday on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:15:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in Marc (2.00 / 1)

As usual your diary is based on supposition and contains no verified facts. She unlike Obama does not need millions and millions to get her message out there to the public.I honestly think all of this record breaking fund raising is a shame. Aren't we supposed to be pushing for public financing in elections to even out the playing field?


by Iceblinkjm on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:59:11 AM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in Marc (none / 0)

You are right, this diary contains speculation not backed up by facts and we won't know anything definitively until the actual numbers are released (April 20th I think).  That is unfortunate because the point is a valid one, Clinton's campaign really does need money.  She's doing the best she can with this disadvantage by getting free airtime (Leno, SNL, Cable News interviews).  That helps and few other people could operate so well with such a financial handicap, but she is getting outplayed on the ground because of this.  Her financial situation does not bode well for her campaign.  If she pulls out a win in in this battle, her win will be forever compared to Truman's legendary primary victory in 1948.  


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:53:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in Marc (none / 0)

"Aren't we supposed to be pushing for public financing in elections to even out the playing field?"

Running a winning campaign on $100 contributions which demand no quid pro quo is the best kind of public financing.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:18:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton only raised $7 million in Marc (none / 0)

it is false, Romana has corrected the estimate himself.

Also, his original estimate was based on foolish aassumptions; Hillary declared some 20 million $ for the general election in her February filling, which of course were all collected since the start of her campaign. Romano didn't get it and went to declare the from the 35 mil she collected in February, 20 were for the general election. These Obama pundits really really suck.


by eumc on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:05:07 AM EST

what a joke! (2.00 / 4)

a really big joke.

This is two diaries by you that should have been posted on April fools day.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:31:43 AM EST

Obama's Torturer in Chief (2.00 / 3)

LOL KathyM, you try too hard and you're way too obvious in your strange over zealousness to be effective. You're an admirable self-starter though, Obama's little homemade Torquemada, chief of the Spanish Inquisition. Don't cut yourself with all those specially made Clinton torture diaries you trot out daily. You are entertaining though, I've never seen such dedication, a cross between the main character in the Exorcist and Inspector Closeau of Pink Panther fame. Boy those Clintons must have you spinning daily! Can't wait for the next installment of Clinton Gotcha!  A little boiling oil perhaps? a bit of drawing and quartering, hmm? You're way past cigarette burns with those indestructible Clinton's. This is better than watching Tom and Jerry! (er, you're Tom by the way, the Clintons are Jerry). Good Luck!


by superetendar on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:11:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

she raised 3 millions just in last 3 days of March (none / 0)

and she raised a huge amount in first 4 days of March before TX. And she raised a lot in between.
My point is your post is a stupid pro-Obama propaganda and a wishful thinking.
Just ask Elton John.
Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties
by engels on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:40:09 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.