Clinton’s Cash

-

dollars pic.jpg
Hillary Clinton’s campaign reports that since the race was called in favor of Clinton tonight by the major networks, more than $2.5 million has flowed in.
No report from the Obama campaign, but they are still way ahead on cash in hand.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

25 comments on “Clinton’s Cash

  1. robin m says:

    Chesire11
    I whole heartedly agree

    Reply

  2. Chesire11 says:

    The fact that Terry McAuliffe has been able to so accurately predict how much cash would come rolling in to the Clinton campaign within the first 24 hours after her victory in PA makes me a bit skeptical. How much of the $10 million were already “in the bag” but not announced until 4/24 to pump up the storyline that the momentum has shifted in Hillary’s favor? How much of the total were contingent upon a solid PA victory to convince big money donors that her campaign isn’t about to collapse? It looks to me as though this was an engineered story by the Clinton campaign.
    In any case, while I have never been a particular fan of Hillary’s, I was always perfectly well satisfied with the prospect of her being the Democratic standard bearer in the general election. (I prefer Obama, but am hardly a disciple!) More and more, however, I find myself dismayed by her behavior on the campaign trail. I understand that politics is a contact sport, but I am disgusted by her willingness to engage in spurious, swiftboating of a fellow Democrat then excuse her behavior on the basis that she’s only doing what McCain will do in the fall – frankly I wouldn’t accept that sort of behavior or excuse from my seven year old much less from a politician! Since when has being hatchet-man for the Republicans been a Democratic leader responsibility? Hillary’s enthusiastic embrace of every vapid question thrown at Obama in the ABC debate was not only unseemly, but was part of her increasingly desperate and embarrassing race to the bottom.
    Personally, I think we should expect better from our leaders.

    Reply

  3. Steve Clemons says:

    MarkL — That’s an overstatement. There are great discussions here at TWN. You may not like them — and certainly some have reached decibel levels I havent appreciated, but this is not a garbage dump.
    Best regards,
    Steve Clemons

    Reply

  4. MarkL says:

    NobCentral,
    Thanks for the huge laugh, when you said this blog is about serious, intellectual discussion.
    That has not been the case in the comments section for at least two years. It is a garbage dump, unfortunately.

    Reply

  5. Tahoe Editor says:

    Hooray!

    Reply

  6. arthurdecco says:

    TE, You’re no Limbaugh – he’s clever in an offensive way – you’re simply offensive.
    And this is the last thing I have to say to you about anything:
    Pffft! (waves hand dismissively)

    Reply

  7. Tahoe Editor says:

    arthur, you’re brilliant, and I’m exposed. I’m really Rush Limbaugh using a pseudonym.
    What ISP are you using that forces you to read my words? Sounds pretty Orwellian to me.
    Have you had much success with “shut up and go away” in your life?

    Reply

  8. arthurdecco says:

    I’m coming to the conclusion you must be a paid Republican troll, Tahoe Editor – no one else could be so purposefully dim and offensive while ostensibly trying to convince others what a wonderful President Senator Clinton would make.
    I’m almost reflexively anti-Clinton after a month of reading your obnoxious, strident shilling for her. And I’m a Canadian with no axe to grind! Gawd knows what thoughtful Americans, forced to read your endless cheerleading BS think of you and your candidate by now.
    Why don’t you go out and hammer in some election signs or something? …anything to release the grinding, blinding aggression you bring to every conversation here on Mr. Clemons’ blog.

    Reply

  9. Tahoe Editor says:

    Hillary has bipartisan support? Sounds good to me.
    Obama: A Thin Record For a Bridge Builder (David Ignatius)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022902784.html

    Reply

  10. arthurdecco says:

    “$2.5 million came in during the first 3 hours after PA’s polls closed — 80% from new donors to the campaign.” posted by Tahoe Editor
    I wonder how large a chunk of that total is Republican money, hoping against hope that she will use the funds to further destroy any hope of a Democrat victory in November.

    Reply

  11. Tahoe Editor says:

    — BHO is in the fine tradition of Dem losers.
    — Superdelegates were created for a reason.
    You may cling to any April-May poll numbers you find that reflect what you want to see; I don’t put much stock in them. Though of course if you want to play that game, there are plenty of polls that have Clinton beating McCain.
    Fact is Obama’s risky
    http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1088709&srvc=home&position=comment

    Reply

  12. Nobcentral says:

    I submitted a response but as it contained some links it has been held. So, I’ll just say this:
    Your point is now that even though Obama is preferable to Dems, the leadership should overturn the will of the people based on the idea that Hill is more appealing to the general public.
    That’s what we’ve come to with the Hillary supporters. Pathetic.
    Have you checked any polls recently? Obama is beating McCain. Hillary is too (in the pollster average) but by like .06%.
    But really, take out the name Hillary and Barack and compare 2 candidates. One has $40 million cash on hand and is winning the democratic primary. The other is in the red and is losing the democratic primary. Is there any world in which in the abstract you would pick the 2nd candidate? If you answer yes then your credibility is reduced to zero.

    Reply

  13. Nobcentral says:

    You obviously have never heard of Pollster.com but even if you were correct that Clinton was more desirable to the “nation” would that justify the party leaders ignoring the will of the party and playing Queen-maker? Because that’s all your left with – a factually inaccurate claim that Hill is more appealing to the general public and that justifies overturning the entire primary season and making her the nominee.
    Anyway.
    Pollster average Clinton v McCain: 45.8 – 45.1
    Pollster average Obama v McCain: 46.2 – 44.6
    Gallup Daily National Poll: Obama 50% – Clinton 42%
    http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/106765/Gallup-Daily-Obama-50-Clinton-42-Nationally.aspx

    Reply

  14. Tahoe Editor says:

    Your willfully ignoring the obvious — 2,025 needed to win — reflects the weak “let’s stop this while we’re ahead” mentality of many in the BO camp.
    Obama may be more “desirable” to “Democrats.”
    But he’s not more desirable to the general electorate.
    MarkL hit the nail on the head: “the Dems will choose Obama because losing comes so naturally to them.”

    Reply

  15. Nobcentral says:

    I put “MORE” in all caps in the hopes that you would, you know, read it but apparently not. You could make an argument that Hill is JUST AS desirable to Democrats as Obama, but you can’t say she’s MORE desirable as every bit of lickspittle that makes it from your keyboard to the internets suggests.
    Speaking of head in the clouds or in the sand, Obama already won this thing and you have yet to figure that out.

    Reply

  16. Tahoe Editor says:

    “resoundly rebuked”? Life is simple with your head in the clouds or in the sand.

    Reply

  17. Nobcentral says:

    You know Tahoe Editor, I’m getting really tired of your tripe. This blog is supposed to be about serious, intellectual analysis yet you just repeat tired lines from a flailing campaign. Do you get the Clinton emails and just copy paste?
    Obama is winning:
    a) the popular vote
    b) states
    c) delegates
    d) pledged delegates since Super Tuesday
    e) money
    f) head to head vs. McCain
    Any spin that Hillary is somehow MORE appealing to democrats or MORE qualified than Obama at this point has been resoundly rebuked. Yet you continue with your blather.
    I’ve got no problem with SUBSTANTIVE arguments about why you prefer Hill to Barack but at this point, everyone who reads this blog knows where your support lies. You don’t need to keep on keeping on. WE GOT IT. You like Hill. The next time you post should be when you’ve got something new to say that can’t be read in a Hillary 08 campaign email.
    No. she. won’t.

    Reply

  18. Tahoe Editor says:

    $2.5 million came in during the first 3 hours after PA’s polls closed — 80% from new donors to the campaign.
    Romney couldn’t buy the nomination, and it appears Obama won’t be able to, either.

    Reply

  19. Tahoe Editor says:

    I agree. Hillary is trying to save the Democratic Party. Barack will have an inestimable volume of new-found pride to swallow in January when he comes back to Earth and has to learn how to hold a subcommittee hearing on Europe. I wonder how bitter he will be then — we’ll likely hear a lot of “America sux and has no hope because it didn’t put ME in the White House.”

    Reply

  20. MarkL says:

    Serious Democrats must be pissing their pants at the prospect of Obama as the nominee now.
    I predict the Dems will choose Obama because losing comes so naturally to them; however, I greatly appreciate that Hillary is staying in—at least we have a chance with Hillary.

    Reply

  21. Tahoe Editor says:

    Uhh … Billy never got 50% because of Ross Perot, not because he was “selfish” and “electorally dismissive.” Talk about rewriting history.
    Barack is betting on painting all the Bush years and all the Clinton years with the same brush and then saying, “They’re all no good, but believe in me because I’m the answer.” I say best of luck to him with that, but comments like the above only represent disdain for those pesky voters and the enormous support behind Hillary.
    The only winners the Democrats have produced in recent years are destroying the party? No.
    Hillary is a Republican? No.
    Get real.
    Yes she will.

    Reply

  22. citizen says:

    she will need every penny in order to continue her re-write of her history…..labor 527’s will turn her into human punching bag in indiana, focusing on clinton leadership of the 90’s, impeachment and bill’s financial ties to terrorist groups linked to 911, including his unwillingness to kill osama in 1998…..
    At this point hrc’s negative campaign is having a significant toll on the the entire fall ticket…only a clinton could be this selfish and electorally dismissive, perhaps why billy never got 50%….bottom line—she has become a republican and since she was eliminated in wisconsin, she has spent 50 million destroying the democratic party….of which i am not a member, strong independent, none the less it has been very disappointing, albeit not surprising, to watch the clintons redestroy the democratic party…history seems to repeat. Gingrich, Bush, Rove–all by products of clinton culture…

    Reply

  23. carsick says:

    Lordy, Obama is way ahead on money, delegates and popular votes. She’s hoping for a scandal to erupt and wipe him away and if it doesn’t…”Donuts! Donuts for Mr. McCain!”

    Reply

  24. Mr.Murder says:

    Persons i know are getting requests for 50 bucks having just visited his site or signed for email.
    They never agreed to such items. Perhaps his big money push was smoke and hot air?
    Dollars and “sense” will win this election, not just dollars. Obama may find self indebted.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *