An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Presidential fundraising from small donors enhances perceptions of candidate

So says a report covered here by the Center for Media Research.

A new BYU/Harris Poll of 2,602 U.S. adults surveyed in May by Harris Interactive shows that small individual contributions which may limit the “corrupting” influence of large contributions, especially from PACs and lobbyists, could have a lasting impact with the voters.

This latest study looks at candidates who raise most of their money from small donors ($200 or less) versus large donors ($2000 or more). Ultimately, Americans are more likely to respond positively to a candidate who raises campaign funds from small donors, concludes the report.

Specific findings include:

More specifically, the results include:

  • 39% of U.S. adults say they would have a more positive view of a candidate who raises from small donors while just 5 percent would have a more positive view of one who raised from large donors
  • 27% of Americans would have a more negative view of a candidate who raised more than half of his or her money from large donors
  • 58% say their view of a candidate would be neither more negative nor positive about a candidate who takes mostly from small donors
  • 68% say the same regarding one who takes mostly from large donors

Among the 11% of Americans who have made a political contribution in this political season:

  • 38% were more likely to respond negatively to a candidate who relies primarily on large donors than were those who did not donate (26%)
  • Among this group of donors, 68% were more positive in their views of candidates who relied more on small donors

When asked how their feelings would change about a candidate who raised $84 million through his or her own efforts, 57% said that it would not affect their views negatively nor positively and, on balance, views were more positive than negative (28% positive vs. 15% negative). When compared against a similar candidate who raised $168 million, responses were virtually identical, says the report (25% positive, 58% neither, 17% negative).

Good news for the Barack Obama campaign, and for people who can only give a little, or only want to give a little. I also don’t think this is anything we didn’t already know, but certain strategists and politicians might prefer that such theories not be confirmed.

  • superdestroyer
    I wonder how many believe that people can give millions to a single candidate or that corporation can give directly to a candidate. Most people do not have a clue how money is raise for candidates. Even though their perceptions are important, that probably have no basis in reality.
  • You raise good points, questions & concerns. Sadly, our entire political system is made of teaching us from a young age to expect one thing and then, when we become adults and go out into the world, things are not as we were taught. I'd say that this system of how funding works falls into that category. But there are a lot of groups out there that work against each other - trying to dispel myths and others propelling them, and still others trying to be watchdogs.

    This is one of the reasons that blogs and other more independent information sources are flourishing - people do not know what to trust for information any more.
  • Silhouette
    It's more accurate to say that in Obama's case, the amount of donations he got from his support base of struggling 20-somethings vs Clinton's more-established, more numerous supporters enhances my curiosity. It also enhances my desire to see an audit of those contributions before the democrat Convention in August where died-in-the-wool republicans will preside over the formal vote to usher in their favored boy: Obama.
  • Can you speak more directly - I don't understand what you are saying re: dyed in wool GOP being at the Dem convention?

    Do you want to offer up whatever audit you rely on for the assertion that Obama's base is composed of "struggling 20-somethings"?

    Sorry - I'm completely not getting what you're point is.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC