« Book Review: Oliver Sacks’ ‘Musicophilia’
Why Do Iraq War Movies Tank at the Box Office? »



Clinton Team Breaking the Bank

March 30th, 2008
By JAZZ SHAW, Assistant Editor

Print Print

It’s not easy to win a presidential primary, nor is it cheap. This is a lesson that Hillary Clinton’s campaign seems to be learning as they go. During a time when you are trying to bolster the troops and keep confidence among your supporters high, leaving a string of unpaid campaign bills and frustrated, angry vendors probably isn’t the best message to send.

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months — freeing up cash for critical media buys, but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small business circles.

The Clinton campaign is still aggressively raising funds in impressive amounts, so why would they not take care of the caterer after the party?

The New York senator’s presidential campaign ended February with $38 million in the bank, according to a report filed last week with the Federal Election Commission, but only $16 million of that can be spent on her battle with Obama.

The rest can only be spent in the general election, if she makes it that far, and must be returned if she doesn’t. If she had paid off the $8.7 million in unpaid bills she reported as debt and had not loaned her campaign $5 million, the cash she would have had available at the end of last month to spend on television ads and other up-front expenses would have been less than $2 million.

$2 million, while it may be significant to you or me, is not much to wage a primary battle against Barack Obama across multiple states. Senator Clinton will likely burn through more than that in Pennsylvania media buys alone. By contrast, Obama can subtract out the money which must be held for the general election and his comparatively paultry $600K in debts he’s still sitting on a cool $31 million.

Fundraising and management of resources is an important yardstick in a national campaign. Read what you like into the polls, but the old phrase ‘follow the money’ has particular significance here. If your opponent is still firing volleys at you, but you’ve run out of ammo to fire back, the fight begins to turn into a rout. Senator Clinton still insists she is in this for the long haul, but as David Brooks recently put it, this may be a case of The Long Defeat.



This entry was posted on Sunday, March 30th, 2008 at 6:46 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, Hillary Clinton, Democrats, 2008 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 7 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    This is a very realistic and non biased article. Hopefully after Pennsylvania and North Carolina results, this party can focus on November.
    • ^
    • v
    How a candidate runs their campaign is an important indication of how someone will run the country and how they govern.
    The fact that there is alot of infighting, mismanagement and the on going money problems with Clinton's campaign should make many people nervous. You have to wonder about her management style and ability to run things.
    You look at Obama;s campaign and there is not the drama and infighting. By all accounts it's a close knit operation. And very well run and managed. This should make many feel secure that an Obama presidency would be efficient and smooth running - as much as running the country can be.
    • ^
    • v
    Another point worth noting is that Obama has raised more from more people in smaller donations than anyone in history. He is the only candidate who can take on the corporate money machine with small donations and not owe the insurance, petroleum, banking interests or the very wealthy any favors or quid pro quo.
    • ^
    • v
    Jazz (and manasia, vwcat and GreenDreams), I agree with everything you all said. I'd also like to add my two cents in this.

    Let me start by saying that I don't know if what I'm about to say is actually true or not, so if anyone has insight to either support or debunk my assertion, I'd love to hear.

    At any rate, one of the things I love about Obama (and I'm primarily using the way he runs his campaign as basis) is that Obama seems to choose the best and brightest people to inform and manage for him.

    Bush (and Hillary) reward loyalty. Whereas there is absolutely nothing wrong with rewarding loyalty, we see what happens when loyalty is rewarded inappropriately. As evidenced by almost the entire Bush administration and by Hillary's campaign mismanagement we can see that the organization doesn't work (and fails) when you reward your supporters by giving them positions they can not handle.

    I'm not saying Obama's campaign won't make mistakes (it has and it will again), and I'm not saying he doesn't have friends in high places- certainly anyone on his campaign (like anyone's campaign) is a loyalist,. But Obama does seem to truly want the best person for the job that he can find. I also think that many people who work for him are somewhat idealistic, which I like, because they want to do good, rather than enrich themselves and their cronies.

    The last thing we want to continue is for the oil companies to continue to make environmental policy (as one example). Many politicians approach politics as a way of accumulating power and once they do so they feel entitled to do what they want for their (and their financial backers') own benefit, and not for the benefit of their constituents.

    It will be interesting to see if power will corrupt Obama in this same way, or if he is one of those rare individuals who can resist the temptation. Given his background, the way he runs his campaign and the fact that he has the courage to speak his mind, even if what he believes isn't popular, I think that he won't let power unduly influence him. I expect to see some mistakes by Obama, but not the sort of systemic concerns and problems in the Bush administration (or Hillary's approach and attitude).
    • ^
    • v
    At any rate, one of the things I love about Obama (and I'm primarily using the way he runs his campaign as basis) is that Obama seems to choose the best and brightest people to inform and manage for him.

    Yeah, Rev Wright is definately one of the best and brightest!
    • ^
    • v
    Wright may have caused a lot of controversy, and that's been debated. but as I mentioned Obama isn't perfect and Wright has gone from Obama's campaign. It's good to see politicians (and I include Hillary in this praise) admit mistakes and do something about it. If Wright had been in the Bush administration, Bush would still be behind him.
    • ^
    • v
    Dear Minions, You see we have a small problem... Your Majesty really screwed up the Primaries and has lost. To keep things going, Your Majesty has had to use some of her own money. It is obvious now that this thing is over but Your Majesty would like to recoup the millions that has been given to the campaign. Please, won't you give me all your money? I can use your money to completely destroy Obama and support McCain so that a Republican can be elected President and I can destroy the Democratic party not only in 2008 but also in 2012!

    Thanking you,
    Your Majesty, Queen Hillary
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Book Review: Oliver Sacks’ ‘Musicophilia’
Why Do Iraq War Movies Tank at the Box Office? »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.