Obama raises $25 million … in one day; Update: Story debunked

For what they’re worth, the Federal Elections Commission have their heads up camels rectums.

An initial summary of Obama’s donations posted on the FEC website Sunday night grouped all of his un-itemized donations of less than $200 on the same day – June 30th.

Sounds like a good way to bury checks dated June 30 or earlier but processed July 1 to July 7. A bugle of $3 or $4 million on the last day would show up like a sore thumb if the small donations were distributed evenly across the month as received.

What recession?

Shy Guy on July 21, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Man these poor liberals have tons of money to just throw down the Obama money hole.. and they want “free” health care… LMAO..

Oh but they don’t have jobs, and the economy is horrible! LMAO

TheBigOldDog on July 21, 2008 at 2:50 PM

If he’s raised $338 million and 94% of it falls below the $200 mark, that means (assuming everyone donated up to the $200 limit) that he’s got roughly 1,588,600 small donors.

I think though that the average donor amount for Obama is roughly $60. Which means he’s got roughly 5,295,333 small donors.

Do those numbers make sense to those of you with more knowledge of the number of small donors that a campaign usually has?

30 June 2008 — Obama raises $25 million.
30 June 2009 — Obama raises taxes $25 million.

Limerick on July 21, 2008 at 2:28 PM

According to the book Freakonomics, it’s somewhat of a myth that a candidate that spends more can buy an election.

I don’t have the book in front of me, but, if I recall correctly, the book said that an unknown candidate can get a bump from large spending as they buy exposure.

However, once the candidate is well known, they gain little to no bump from increased amounts of spending.

Limerick on July 21, 2008 at 2:47 PM

I just think it’s odd that McCain outspent Obama 3-1 in advertising. I assume it means he’s getting his message out in ads more, but I don’t live in a battleground state and I don’t watch much TV, so I can’t tell.

So, correct me if I’m wrong, but all donors under $200 are essentially anonymous? Their names don’t need to be reported, but there must be some record keeping, right? I mean … hello?

To date, Obama has reported raising $338 million for his campaign from individuals and 94% of his donations have come in amounts of $200 or less.

reaganaut on July 21, 2008 at 2:43 PM

Man I hope somebody is digging into this. I really do. When 94% of your money falls under the reporting line that should be seting off alarm bells just like Spitzer’s prostitute transactions set off alarm bells. We have a right to know where that money came from.

reaganaut on July 21, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Thanks! I appreciate the response. It was an honest question. You all know I’m not the most ivy-league HAhead. I just wish more blue-collar, HS diploma, Republicans would check in once in awhile. Not all of us can be CEOs.

Sorry. The FEC isn’t dead; it’s merely pining for the fjords.

NeighborhoodCatLady on July 21, 2008 at 2:24 PM

If the FEC hadn’t been nailed to the floor it would be lying on its back pushing up daisies…

But the $21 million from the un-itemized small donors, which are those who are not named because they haven’t given more than $200,

Does anybody know if this means their names, addresses and place of employment does not need to be disclosed?

Money Nagasaki

Your friends on the left will love your choice of words, as always.

TCP: Typical Chicago Politician

To date, Obama has reported raising $338 million for his campaign from individuals and 94% of his donations have come in amounts of $200 or less.

Limerick on July 21, 2008 at 2:28 PM

Well, according to the story:

McCain in June spent $16 million on advertising, compared to Obama’s reported $5 million. Meanwhile, Obama’s payroll expenses amounted to $2.3 million while McCain’s hovered around $724,000.

The RNC still has a lot more money than the DNC, too.