Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Political discussions
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by AZGrizFan »

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... p=obinsite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A Las Vegas billionaire with ties to Newt Gingrich has given $5 million to an independent group backing the former House Speaker's presidential bid.

A person familiar with the situation said casino mogul Sheldon Adelson made the contribution Friday to Winning Our Future, a pro-Gingrich super PAC. The person said Adelson would spend heavily to assist whichever candidate wins the Republican nomination.

Adelson is a longtime supporter of GOP candidates and has been a friend and backer of Gingrich for many years.

Gingrich's campaign has struggled since a super PAC supporting Mitt Romney spent $3 million on ads attacking him in Iowa.

The Washington Post first reported the $5 million contribution. Politico reported last month that Adelson was prepared to spend $20 million to help Gingrich.
This makes me sick on multiple levels;

a) That any one person can legally give an insane amount of money to one candidate, simply by having one layer of bureaucracy between them....
b) That it takes this much fucking money to get elected;
c) That you can spend $3 mil in fucking IOWA and barely win
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
SuperHornet
SuperHornet
SuperHornet
Posts: 20857
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:24 pm
I am a fan of: Sac State
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by SuperHornet »

I agree with AZ on all of this.

I take it that Gingrich declined federal money? The way I understand it, that's the only way he can get away with this nonsense.
Image

SuperHornet's Athletics Hall of Fame includes Jacksonville State kicker Ashley Martin, the first girl to score in a Division I football game. She kicked 3 PATs in a 2001 game for J-State.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

Money is speech. :coffee:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by dbackjon »

Thank you Bush! This is a direct result of the Citizen United case, which makes all of US irrelevent
:thumb:
User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 25486
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by CID1990 »

dbackjon wrote:Thank you Bush! This is a direct result of the Citizen United case, which makes all of US irrelevent
LOL it's all bush's fault.

You're like a busted shopping cart with a bad wheel..... You squeak and squeak and pull to the left at all times.


Sent from my iPad using one stinky pinky.
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by dbackjon »

CID1990 wrote:
dbackjon wrote:Thank you Bush! This is a direct result of the Citizen United case, which makes all of US irrelevent
LOL it's all bush's fault.

You're like a busted shopping cart with a bad wheel..... You squeak and squeak and pull to the left at all times.


Sent from my iPad using one stinky pinky.
This one IS Bush's fault - their appointees (and Reagen)

Kennedy
Roberts
Scalia
Thomas
Alito
:thumb:
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19233
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by GannonFan »

Money has always been in the elections - to think this is only possible because of the Citizens case is just looney. Money has ruled elections in the US since the beginning and mostly what Citizens did was throw out the crap that the McCain-Feingold was and the weak and ineffectual attempt it was at restricting it. Heck, I'm happy we actually know about this money - I think the transparency is the most important thing. Let people give whatever sums they want to give - as long as we know about it, great. We can decide at the polls how we feel about it. This guy gives $5M - great, good for him. He still only has one vote himself. We get to decide whether we'll give him any more than that.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote:Money has always been in the elections - to think this is only possible because of the Citizens case is just looney. Money has ruled elections in the US since the beginning and mostly what Citizens did was throw out the crap that the McCain-Feingold was and the weak and ineffectual attempt it was at restricting it. Heck, I'm happy we actually know about this money - I think the transparency is the most important thing. Let people give whatever sums they want to give - as long as we know about it, great. We can decide at the polls how we feel about it. This guy gives $5M - great, good for him. He still only has one vote himself. We get to decide whether we'll give him any more than that.
Right, because marketing a product to the masses is ineffective. To quote Dylan Ratigan we no longer have elections, we have auctions.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19233
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote:
GannonFan wrote:Money has always been in the elections - to think this is only possible because of the Citizens case is just looney. Money has ruled elections in the US since the beginning and mostly what Citizens did was throw out the crap that the McCain-Feingold was and the weak and ineffectual attempt it was at restricting it. Heck, I'm happy we actually know about this money - I think the transparency is the most important thing. Let people give whatever sums they want to give - as long as we know about it, great. We can decide at the polls how we feel about it. This guy gives $5M - great, good for him. He still only has one vote himself. We get to decide whether we'll give him any more than that.
Right, because marketing a product to the masses is ineffective. To quote Dylan Ratigan we no longer have elections, we have auctions.
And that's changed how exactly from prior elections? I'd argue that we've had auctions ever since Jefferson and Adams went at it. It's not like elections were pure and innocent up to the moment the Citizens verdict was handed down, as some on here are basically implying. And yes, there are plenty of marketing campaigns to the masses that are ineffective. I didn't drive into work today in an Edsel while drinking some New Coke. I don't care how much money they spent on those campaigns, it didn't work.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19511
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by SDHornet »

CID1990 wrote: You're like a busted shopping cart with a bad wheel..... You squeak and squeak and pull to the left at all times.
:lol:
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote:
kalm wrote:
Right, because marketing a product to the masses is ineffective. To quote Dylan Ratigan we no longer have elections, we have auctions.
And that's changed how exactly from prior elections? I'd argue that we've had auctions ever since Jefferson and Adams went at it. It's not like elections were pure and innocent up to the moment the Citizens verdict was handed down, as some on here are basically implying. And yes, there are plenty of marketing campaigns to the masses that are ineffective. I didn't drive into work today in an Edsel while drinking some New Coke. I don't care how much money they spent on those campaigns, it didn't work.
Who are the top two soft drink producers in the world? Why do you know that? You have far more faith in the intelligence and bullshit regulators of the rabble than I do.

I agree that things were bad before citizens united but I'm guessing the amount of money spent on this year's election will far exceed the typical increase and that ain't good. Why invest $5 million dollars into your company to grow it and beat the competition the old fashioned way through innovation, blood, sweat and tears when you can simply pay off politicians to win favorable contracts or legislation.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19233
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
And that's changed how exactly from prior elections? I'd argue that we've had auctions ever since Jefferson and Adams went at it. It's not like elections were pure and innocent up to the moment the Citizens verdict was handed down, as some on here are basically implying. And yes, there are plenty of marketing campaigns to the masses that are ineffective. I didn't drive into work today in an Edsel while drinking some New Coke. I don't care how much money they spent on those campaigns, it didn't work.
Who are the top two soft drink producers in the world? Why do you know that? You have far more faith in the intelligence and bullshit regulators of the rabble than I do.

I agree that things were bad before citizens united but I'm guessing the amount of money spent on this year's election will far exceed the typical increase and that ain't good. Why invest $5 million dollars into your company to grow it and beat the competition the old fashioned way through innovation, blood, sweat and tears when you can simply pay off politicians to win favorable contracts or legislation.
The two top soft drink producers in the world still had to have decades of selling product to the public and the public deciding they liked those two producers. Neither was created through simply a marketing campaign. If you don't have something to sell, marketing isn't going to be able to overcome that.

And as for the "investment" of $5 million dollars as being the easy way or simple way to competing, we do have the example of this guy giving $5 million dollars to a campaign, the Gingrich campaign, which is very likely soon to be a defeated campaign. I'm not sure that $5 million dollar investment is going to be winning this guy any favorable contracts or legislation. He's the perfect example of why this isn't a sure-fire way to win business.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote:
Who are the top two soft drink producers in the world? Why do you know that? You have far more faith in the intelligence and bullshit regulators of the rabble than I do.

I agree that things were bad before citizens united but I'm guessing the amount of money spent on this year's election will far exceed the typical increase and that ain't good. Why invest $5 million dollars into your company to grow it and beat the competition the old fashioned way through innovation, blood, sweat and tears when you can simply pay off politicians to win favorable contracts or legislation.

The two top soft drink producers in the world still had to have decades of selling product to the public and the public deciding they liked those two producers. Neither was created through simply a marketing campaign. If you don't have something to sell, marketing isn't going to be able to overcome that.

And as for the "investment" of $5 million dollars as being the easy way or simple way to competing, we do have the example of this guy giving $5 million dollars to a campaign, the Gingrich campaign, which is very likely soon to be a defeated campaign. I'm not sure that $5 million dollar investment is going to be winning this guy any favorable contracts or legislation. He's the perfect example of why this isn't a sure-fire way to win business.
Campaigns are different than new coke. In your example, coke would be the political party and new coke would be an unsuccessful candidate. My point was that just because new coke fizzled doesn't mean that marketing doesn't work for both soft drinks and politics.

I was speaking to the broader issue and simply using this guy as an example.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19233
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by GannonFan »

kalm wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
Who are the top two soft drink producers in the world? Why do you know that? You have far more faith in the intelligence and bullshit regulators of the rabble than I do.

I agree that things were bad before citizens united but I'm guessing the amount of money spent on this year's election will far exceed the typical increase and that ain't good. Why invest $5 million dollars into your company to grow it and beat the competition the old fashioned way through innovation, blood, sweat and tears when you can simply pay off politicians to win favorable contracts or legislation.

The two top soft drink producers in the world still had to have decades of selling product to the public and the public deciding they liked those two producers. Neither was created through simply a marketing campaign. If you don't have something to sell, marketing isn't going to be able to overcome that.

And as for the "investment" of $5 million dollars as being the easy way or simple way to competing, we do have the example of this guy giving $5 million dollars to a campaign, the Gingrich campaign, which is very likely soon to be a defeated campaign. I'm not sure that $5 million dollar investment is going to be winning this guy any favorable contracts or legislation. He's the perfect example of why this isn't a sure-fire way to win business.
Campaigns are different than new coke. In your example, coke would be the political party and new coke would be an unsuccessful candidate. My point was that just because new coke fizzled doesn't mean that marketing doesn't work for both soft drinks and politics.

I was speaking to the broader issue and simply using this guy as an example.
But this guy is a great example for the broader picture. Marketing alone, and marketing fueled by large campaign donations, doesn't just push someone who otherwise wouldn't get elected over the top. And that's the essence of this debate - money being the sole decider in who does or doesn't get elected. If it was that easy, the only thing to track would be campaign dollars and just forget voting. In reality, money's going to often come down on both sides of a race - heck, lots of people already hedge their bets and donate to both sides of the aisle. Money tends to follow the guy who gets elected - but it doesn't necessarily lead to who's going to be elected. Like I said, this guy is a great example - he took a $5M bet and he doesn't have any more access now than he did before he put down that money. There'll be a lot more like him and our elections won't be any more different than they've been for the past 200 years. The sky hasn't fallen.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
TwinTownBisonFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 7704
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:56 pm
I am a fan of: NDSU
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by TwinTownBisonFan »

The problem with Citizens United isn't THIS example... the problem with it is allowing corporations to use their coffers to directly fund political activity.

I disagree with Kalm (and many liberals) if Warren Buffett or the Koch Brothers want to donate $5 million to a campaign, they should be able... money does in fact = speech IMO. however, with that being said... I disagree with the Court rulings that somehow corporations are "people"...

It amazes me that people get worked up about money in politics... of course there is money in politics. IIRC about $11 billion was spent in 08 for ALL elections in the US. Just to give an example - an industry of similar size in the US? Chewing gum.
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions

Image
TwinTownBisonFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 7704
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:56 pm
I am a fan of: NDSU
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by TwinTownBisonFan »

GannonFan wrote:
kalm wrote:
Campaigns are different than new coke. In your example, coke would be the political party and new coke would be an unsuccessful candidate. My point was that just because new coke fizzled doesn't mean that marketing doesn't work for both soft drinks and politics.

I was speaking to the broader issue and simply using this guy as an example.
But this guy is a great example for the broader picture. Marketing alone, and marketing fueled by large campaign donations, doesn't just push someone who otherwise wouldn't get elected over the top. And that's the essence of this debate - money being the sole decider in who does or doesn't get elected. If it was that easy, the only thing to track would be campaign dollars and just forget voting. In reality, money's going to often come down on both sides of a race - heck, lots of people already hedge their bets and donate to both sides of the aisle. Money tends to follow the guy who gets elected - but it doesn't necessarily lead to who's going to be elected. Like I said, this guy is a great example - he took a $5M bet and he doesn't have any more access now than he did before he put down that money. There'll be a lot more like him and our elections won't be any more different than they've been for the past 200 years. The sky hasn't fallen.
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions

Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

GannonFan wrote:
kalm wrote:
Campaigns are different than new coke. In your example, coke would be the political party and new coke would be an unsuccessful candidate. My point was that just because new coke fizzled doesn't mean that marketing doesn't work for both soft drinks and politics.

I was speaking to the broader issue and simply using this guy as an example.
But this guy is a great example for the broader picture. Marketing alone, and marketing fueled by large campaign donations, doesn't just push someone who otherwise wouldn't get elected over the top. And that's the essence of this debate - money being the sole decider in who does or doesn't get elected. If it was that easy, the only thing to track would be campaign dollars and just forget voting. In reality, money's going to often come down on both sides of a race - heck, lots of people already hedge their bets and donate to both sides of the aisle. Money tends to follow the guy who gets elected - but it doesn't necessarily lead to who's going to be elected. Like I said, this guy is a great example - he took a $5M bet and he doesn't have any more access now than he did before he put down that money. There'll be a lot more like him and our elections won't be any more different than they've been for the past 200 years. The sky hasn't fallen.
1) I guaranfuckingtee you this guy has access that the average person does not - regardless of whether he backed the wrong horse at this point.

2) The candidate who raises the most money wins upwards of 90% of the time.

:coffee:
Image
Image
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
But this guy is a great example for the broader picture. Marketing alone, and marketing fueled by large campaign donations, doesn't just push someone who otherwise wouldn't get elected over the top. And that's the essence of this debate - money being the sole decider in who does or doesn't get elected. If it was that easy, the only thing to track would be campaign dollars and just forget voting. In reality, money's going to often come down on both sides of a race - heck, lots of people already hedge their bets and donate to both sides of the aisle. Money tends to follow the guy who gets elected - but it doesn't necessarily lead to who's going to be elected. Like I said, this guy is a great example - he took a $5M bet and he doesn't have any more access now than he did before he put down that money. There'll be a lot more like him and our elections won't be any more different than they've been for the past 200 years. The sky hasn't fallen.
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
How much time do they devote to fundraising vs. legislating? How much does the average congressman have to raise per day in order to be competitive? I think voters can still make good voting decisions while that money gets put to better use in the economy.
Image
Image
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by kalm »

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
GannonFan wrote:
But this guy is a great example for the broader picture. Marketing alone, and marketing fueled by large campaign donations, doesn't just push someone who otherwise wouldn't get elected over the top. And that's the essence of this debate - money being the sole decider in who does or doesn't get elected. If it was that easy, the only thing to track would be campaign dollars and just forget voting. In reality, money's going to often come down on both sides of a race - heck, lots of people already hedge their bets and donate to both sides of the aisle. Money tends to follow the guy who gets elected - but it doesn't necessarily lead to who's going to be elected. Like I said, this guy is a great example - he took a $5M bet and he doesn't have any more access now than he did before he put down that money. There'll be a lot more like him and our elections won't be any more different than they've been for the past 200 years. The sky hasn't fallen.
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
BTW, ya think the reason the media covers the money is it might be a key indicator of who wins? It's just like offseason sports reporting on trades, contracts, and salary caps. :coffee:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
DSUrocks07
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:32 pm
I am a fan of: Delaware State
A.K.A.: phillywild305
Location: The 9th Circle of Hellaware

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by DSUrocks07 »

kalm wrote:
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
BTW, ya think the reason the media covers the money is it might be a key indicator of who wins? It's just like offseason sports reporting on trades, contracts, and salary caps. :coffee:
And at the end of the season only one team wins the championship.
MEAC, last one out turn off the lights.

@phillywild305 FB
User avatar
travelinman67
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9884
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:51 pm
I am a fan of: Portland State Vikings
A.K.A.: Modern Man
Location: Where the 1st Amendment still exists: CS.com

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by travelinman67 »

kalm wrote:
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
How much time do they devote to fundraising vs. legislating? How much does the average congressman have to raise per day in order to be competitive? I think voters can still make good voting decisions while that money gets put to better use in the economy.
One of the few times I agree with TTBF.

Money flows from all directions, and is a necessity...

...because a large percentage of American voters are IDIOTS!

Rather than embodying wisdom and integrity, listening to each candidate's platform and choosing who'll they'll vote for based upon sound logic, the American voter routinely becomes distracted (persuaded) by nonsensical commentary spewed by people who are more suited to self-adulation than political analysis. Candidates feel obligated to incessantly scream their message from every corner and rooftop in an attempt to retain the voter's miniscule attention.

Repeatedly, polls show many voters don't "decide" on who they're voting for until a few days before the election. This "indecision" is principally responsible for the unproductive patterns of political fundraising.

Were the American voter to approach their "duty" with maturity and a sense of responsibility, the need for the "never-ending" campaign wouldn't exist.
"That is how government works - we tell you what you can do today."
- EPA Kommissar Gina McCarthy
TwinTownBisonFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 7704
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:56 pm
I am a fan of: NDSU
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by TwinTownBisonFan »

kalm wrote:
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
THIS. THIS x 6.93...

Part of the problem is that the media covers the money more than they cover the race itself... they fixate on it - in part - because we as operatives fixate on it.

I will add one thing... while money doesn't make a winner, a LACK of money pretty much guarantees a loser. However, raising campaign cash isn't that hard... without much effort a decent Congressional can raise a million bucks for their run... which should be enough to win.
How much time do they devote to fundraising vs. legislating? How much does the average congressman have to raise per day in order to be competitive? I think voters can still make good voting decisions while that money gets put to better use in the economy.
This will read as far more "know it all douchey" than I intend - for that I apologize in advance but...

As the one poster on this board who has worked for an incumbent member of Congress (on their re-elect effort) I assure you... they spend more time legislating BY FAR. In a given week, I was lucky if I got 3-5 hours of call time. I would sit in scheduling meetings with the district staff and they'd budget 85% of the Reps time to legislative... I got what was left. A few morning fundraisers, one evening a month, and a few pockets of call time each week. We got it done in that time - I also raised plenty on my own, but it was a pain in the ass.

This is one of those things where perception and reality have nothing to do with each other. I think you are under the impression (and I'm sure there's a Taibbi article that makes this claim) that all members do is whore for money... and occasionally represent their constituents... it's completely bogus. It has nothing to do with party either... the vast majority of members spend about 75-85% of their time taking meetings with constituent groups, working in committee, voting on the floor and receiving briefings - the rest is left to "campaign activity" which usually means a trip over to the DNC or RNC building and grinding out calls to donors (usually inviting them to an event... most pols can't or won't do straight cash calls) and then it's back to the official grind 3 hours later. (pols are also amazing in their ability to get out of call time)

Trust me when I say that while there are reps who truly love raising money (they are usually legends around the hill - at least among us hacks) the vast majority do it as little as they have to - and just want to get back to work.

As for how much per day? depends on the district. let's go with an extreme example on the high side and one on the low. take a freshman rep in a swing district for example - in a decent sized media market: you'd need to raise about $3 million to fend off the other side - especially if they are targeting you (and they probably are) which works out to around $4,000 a day. Every day. However, the max donation is $5,000 from individuals (2 $2500 donations in truth) and PACs can give $10,000 (2 $5000 donations). You can also raise $4,000 from other candidate committees.

So, you need 28k/wk. In theory. To run the hottest of Congressional races... It's not too terribly hard, given where the limits are, and if you're willing to work hard.

A safe incumbent can get by with $750k. or about $1,000/day... that's spit in the ocean... get PAC max and a couple of $500 donations and you are set for the week.
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions

Image
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by AZGrizFan »

TwinTownBisonFan wrote: However, the max donation is $5,000 from individuals (2 $2500 donations in truth) and PACs can give $10,000 (2 $5000 donations). You can also raise $4,000 from other candidate committees.
So how does a guy legally donate $5 million to a PAC that will almost certainly all go to Gingrich?
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
Cap'n Cat
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 13614
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:38 am
I am a fan of: Mostly myself.
A.K.A.: LabiaInTheSunlight

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by Cap'n Cat »

AZGrizFan wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... p=obinsite
A Las Vegas billionaire with ties to Newt Gingrich has given $5 million to an independent group backing the former House Speaker's presidential bid.

A person familiar with the situation said casino mogul Sheldon Adelson made the contribution Friday to Winning Our Future, a pro-Gingrich super PAC. The person said Adelson would spend heavily to assist whichever candidate wins the Republican nomination.

Adelson is a longtime supporter of GOP candidates and has been a friend and backer of Gingrich for many years.

Gingrich's campaign has struggled since a super PAC supporting Mitt Romney spent $3 million on ads attacking him in Iowa.

The Washington Post first reported the $5 million contribution. Politico reported last month that Adelson was prepared to spend $20 million to help Gingrich.
This makes me sick on multiple levels;

a) That any one person can legally give an insane amount of money to one candidate, simply by having one layer of bureaucracy between them....
b) That it takes this much fucking money to get elected;
c) That you can spend $3 mil in fucking IOWA and barely win


Agreed, my desert brother from another mother.

:nod: :nod: :nod:
User avatar
SuperHornet
SuperHornet
SuperHornet
Posts: 20857
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:24 pm
I am a fan of: Sac State
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA

Re: Billionaire Gives $5 MILLION to Gingrich Campaign

Post by SuperHornet »

AZGrizFan wrote:
TwinTownBisonFan wrote: However, the max donation is $5,000 from individuals (2 $2500 donations in truth) and PACs can give $10,000 (2 $5000 donations). You can also raise $4,000 from other candidate committees.
So how does a guy legally donate $5 million to a PAC that will almost certainly all go to Gingrich?
The way I understand it, it's legal if Gingrich chooses to eschew federal funding. Stupid, I know....
Image

SuperHornet's Athletics Hall of Fame includes Jacksonville State kicker Ashley Martin, the first girl to score in a Division I football game. She kicked 3 PATs in a 2001 game for J-State.
Post Reply