O’Donnell ended campaign with almost $1 million in treasury

posted at 9:02 pm on December 3, 2010 by Allahpundit

Commenters in the Headlines thread are grumbling about this, no doubt remembering that (a) she’s been accused before by former aides of using campaign donations for personal expenses and (b) she did plenty of grumbling herself a few weeks before the election that the NRSC wasn’t spending enough to help her. Why didn’t she spend more to beat Coons?

Well, for one thing, she did spend a ton. The Politico story neglects to mention it but the $6.1 million she plowed into the race shattered the state record for expenditures on a Senate campaign by more than a million dollars and doubled the amount Coons spent. It’s not like she was holding back to maximize the leftover amount for her to live on after the election. Besides, there were other considerations to think about, which the Politico story does note:

O’Donnell spokesman Matthew Moran said O’Donnell was advised by her attorney to reserve “several hundred thousand dollars” for after Election Day to use for legal challenges resulting from her campaign — such as a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission filed by the state GOP during the primary and a criminal complaint filed with the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

The campaign was also holding on to money for “the inevitable FEC wrap-ups because we had so many small donors, etc.” that ongoing legal actions could drag on for “years,” Moran wrote in an e-mail to POLITICO. “Lastly, much of that money came in so late that we could not spend it effectively and would not recklessly put the campaign into debt … obviously, all checks that came in dated after the election were returned by Friends of Christine O’Donnell.”

O’Donnell’s FEC report shows that $1,966 in contributions came in to her campaign after Election Day.

I’m eager to hear from political consultants on this as I honestly have no idea whether this sounds plausible, implausible, or somewhere in between. A Twitter pal of mine, who’s a consultant himself but no fan of O’Donnell’s, insists that it’s not the hard number that’s important but the ratio between the money left over and the total amount raised. Twenty percent would be an unusual figure, he claims, but O’Donnell’s ratio isn’t that high — just shy of 13 percent, in fact. Given the legal challenges she’s facing, is that really so preposterous an amount? Besides, she doesn’t need the campaign money to live on: She just landed a deal to write a book which she hopes will, er, be “one of the [conservative] revolution’s catalysts.”

Here’s video of her appearance on GMA from a few days ago, in which she famously encouraged Hillary Clinton to challenge Obama. Sounds … unlikely. Exit question: Could the NRSC really have helped her? She spent a bundle and still lost by 16 points; meanwhile, the NRSC dumped millions on Carly Fiorina in California and lost there anyway. Some red candidates in deep blue states just aren’t going to win.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Just because Mike Castle was a turd doesn’t mean O’Donnell didn’t stink. She wasn’t the ideal candidate but I would rather that we have a shot at Coons than to have another RINO whose vote might betray conservatives and thus destroy the Republican party.

Bill C on December 3, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Some red candidates in deep blue states just aren’t going to win.

Alas.

Alas, alas, alas. California, we are doomed.

John the Libertarian on December 3, 2010 at 9:06 PM

What if the money she had couldn’t be spend in the time allotted?

lorien1973 on December 3, 2010 at 9:08 PM

Some red candidates in deep blue states just aren’t going to win.

true. But, there are red candidates that can win, they just have to be extraordinarily special. Reagan and Christie. Christie’s success in NJ has got to be fast pulling into Reagan territory with his job in CA back in the 70′s.

ted c on December 3, 2010 at 9:10 PM

She spent a lot of money and sounds like she reserved some due to legal advice, what`s the story here? Just let her go, no need to keep starting food fights in here!

bluemarlin on December 3, 2010 at 9:11 PM

Some red candidates in deep blue states just aren’t going to win.

Some deep blue states don’t render to instant gratification contests … some take some time to turn around.

Texas Gal on December 3, 2010 at 9:11 PM

Some red candidates in deep blue states just aren’t going to win.

YET!!!!

bluemarlin on December 3, 2010 at 9:13 PM

Holy crap. Nicole Nikpour is on Hannity and she looks like a cross between Joan Jett, Cher, and a French doilie (sic)…I like the gal but puhlease gir fren.

ted c on December 3, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Good grief. And if the campaign ended up a million in the hole it would’ve been another story.

The O’Donnell detractors are fascinating. They just can’t let it go.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Maybe it was the refund for those two thirty minute spots that she bought on the local TV station(s)…

… who conveintly “forgot” to air them, twice.

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

She is a money pit disaster.

WisCon on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

If we didn’t learn anything from the Charles Rangel censure

then, COD deserves a standing Ovation.

Kini on December 3, 2010 at 9:18 PM

E

xit question: Could the NRSC really have helped her? She spent a bundle and still lost by 16 points..

You answered your own question.

The NSRC could’ve spent another 25 million and it wouldn’t have helped her. Money can’t solve an incompetent candidate’s problems.

BacaDog on December 3, 2010 at 9:19 PM

call it a good start on a 2012 House campaign. Or maybe she’ll pass that support on to other candidates like her in the ’12 race, whom the RINOs similarly fail to support.

rayra on December 3, 2010 at 9:23 PM

She is a money pit disaster.

WisCon on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

But yet Whitman and Fiorina weren’t.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

“I’m not a witch rich.” — Christine O’Donnell

John the Libertarian on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

When are we going to hear the results of the poll?

Kini on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

That will pay down the debts on the condo.

bayview on December 3, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Oh look, a dead horse! Let`s beat it! :)

ThePrez on December 3, 2010 at 9:27 PM

O’Donnell spokesman Matthew Moran said O’Donnell was advised by her attorney to reserve “several hundred thousand dollars” for after Election Day to use for legal challenges resulting from her campaign — such as a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission filed by the state GOP during the primary and a criminal complaint filed with the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
==========================================================

I would imagine that would be gone in no time,with legal fees!

On the otherhand(sarcastically)she could plow that Million
into a start-up of Cauldron Production in case theres a
Wicca demand of!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:27 PM

To bad she lost.

tinkerthinker on December 3, 2010 at 9:28 PM

Here it comes.

Bishop on December 3, 2010 at 9:30 PM

She needs this stuff to put in her book. Otherwise, it will be about three chapters and sixty pages.

swamp_yankee on December 3, 2010 at 9:30 PM

Clearly this is Karl Rove’s fault.

Speedwagon82 on December 3, 2010 at 9:31 PM

But yet Whitman and Fiorina weren’t.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

good point. Meggie is about 140 large in the hole.

ted c on December 3, 2010 at 9:32 PM

She just landed a deal to write a book which she hopes will, er, be “one of the [conservative] revolution’s catalysts.”

Her book will end up being fodder for late night comedians and that’s about it.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Hey, the next campaign started Nov 3rd.

Go Christine!

eyesky on December 3, 2010 at 9:34 PM

I’ll admit that some of that is MINE. I gave to her in small quantities. Part of me is glad that she now has the money to do something with her life that is legitimate – like start a business, gain some gravitas, and then RUN IN 2014. Perfection.

athenadelphi on December 3, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Her book will end up being fodder for late night comedians and that’s about it.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Well unlike Romney’s opus, at least someone will be paying attention to it.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Well, we all knew she was a nut. What else is new.

Chudi on December 3, 2010 at 9:38 PM

She is a money pit disaster.

WisCon on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM
====================
But yet Whitman and Fiorina weren’t.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

ddrintin:Speaking of Whitman:)
===========================================================

Details on how Meg Whitman spent $160 million — and counting — to try to be gov
——————————

We’re all thinking the same thing as the polls are about to close in California: How did Meg Whitman spend $160 million — $141.5 of her own cash — in her quest to be gov. You’ve really got to try hard to tear up that kind of cabbage.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=76126#ixzz176hMpULl

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 PM

Oh Sh*t,I would still support O`Donnell,but I`ve finally
have heard the Crazy Talk,support HilRod,and she might
change her registration,from her lips,sweet F`n Ugh!!

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:45 PM

With that kind of cash O’Donnell should be able to make one hell of a witches brew.

Plenty of money for plenty of eye of newt, toe of frog, wool of bat, and tongue of dog. Tasty and effective.

I hope she turns Rove into a toad.

chief on December 3, 2010 at 9:47 PM

NEEDING COMMENTS ARE WE NOW AP?!

Yay! A fun, extended metaphor!

Sweet Christmas, Iron Fist! The Delaware Senate election is over? What should we do?”

“I know, Luke Cage! Let’s sit around and talk about how much THE DAZZLER sucks! rofl x infinity!”

“But, Iron Fist, we posed with her for that one cover? And we look like ridiculous jerkoffs, too! I’m even wearing comfortable women’s toe shoes!”

“Iron Fist! Don’t forget she has that wicked reactionary, vengeful sister, SARAH PALIN (or Lois London or something), who MURDERS CATS!!!!

“That’s so right, but even so, we’re still we’re associated with them, Luke Cage!”

“Whatever, Luke! She they both have boobies and is totally asking for it! Never mind our nancy-fied outfits; that dumb ho wore ROLLERSKATES and her sister’s hair is LOL!”

“LOL YOU’RE SO RIGHT! DOWN WITH THEM! WE’RE THE BEST!

Aaaaaaaand…. ‘kay.

lansing quaker on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

I hope when Palin runs for president, Christine O’Donnell campaigns with her.

ninjapirate on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

We’re all thinking the same thing as the polls are about to close in California: How did Meg Whitman spend $160 million — $141.5 of her own cash — in her quest to be gov. You’ve really got to try hard to tear up that kind of cabbage.

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 PM

I love Whitman and her story of success. I can’t help thinking her kids are not too happy with her now – blowing their inheritance.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Exit question: Could the NRSC really have helped her?

I don’t know if they could have helped her, but they could have at least refrained from trying to hurt her by announcing they wouldn’t support her on the night she won the primary. Ditto with Tokyo Rove, Krauthammer, and all the other iceholes that kept pounding away on her after she won the primary.

It’s one thing to say she wasn’t the ideal nominee. It’s quite another to keep attacking her during the general election campaign, which amounted to aiding and abetting the Coons campaign.

A lot of us didn’t like McCain being the nominee in ’08, and in fact thought it downright sucked. But at least we held our fire until after the campaign was over.

thirteen28 on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Aw, my multi-link satire was filtered. :(

lansing quaker on December 3, 2010 at 9:49 PM

When 80% of the Democrats are Marxist and 20% of the Republicans are progressives it is still no surprise that Delaware now has a bald Marxist as senator.

I am like you PAC may be a good title once the bills are paid and if she can put the war chest into a PAC.

tjexcite on December 3, 2010 at 9:49 PM

The campaign was also holding on to money for “the inevitable FEC wrap-ups because we had so many small donors, etc.” that ongoing legal actions could drag on for “years,” Moran wrote in an e-mail to POLITICO.

? How well did POLITICO observe and report Obama’s sudden open-ended credit card shenanigans? Did Politico ever report that there were millions of “small donors” who will never be known because of the system that allowed anonymous donors to be from anywhere in the world? In the spirit of the 9/11 truthers, did this nation elect a President who was financed by foreign governments or a shadow entity? Why did the FEC never investigate this or at least release a report that would put American voters to rest?

Obama raises over $4,000,000.00, (with little recorded with the FEC) and no one questioned this, yet we should care if O’Donnell save a million for future expenses?

Give me a break!

Rovin on December 3, 2010 at 9:50 PM

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 PM
=======================
I love Whitman and her story of success. I can’t help thinking her kids are not too happy with her now – blowing their inheritance.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

sherry: Never that of that,haha,ahem!

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:51 PM

I love Whitman and her story of success. I can’t help thinking her kids are not too happy with her now – blowing their inheritance.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

She has around $900 million more, I think her kids will be just fine.

bluemarlin on December 3, 2010 at 9:51 PM

Delaware is just another California without looking for a $20 billion dollar handout from YOU the taxpayers.

Rovin on December 3, 2010 at 9:53 PM

I’m not sure why people are amazed that the Delaware incident was such an effin train wreck. It surprises me not in the least considering the things that I saw cars with Delaware plates do while I was living in South Eastern Virginia, and particularly when I got a look at the place while driving through once.

Tip – The witch is probably one of the saner residents of that state. They are the folks that graced us with Slo Joe, Dontcha know!

Wind Rider on December 3, 2010 at 9:55 PM

I love Whitman and her story of success.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Yeah, but she’s wearing the big loser “L” even more so than O’Donnell. A more expensive one, at that. Money pit? LOL

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM

I’m glad that she saved some of the campaign funds. That $1 million wouldn’t have closed the voter gap. The Republican Congressional candidate who ran at-large in the same area and who was not a high profile candidate got a lower percentage of the votes than she did.

Those who fight and run away live to fight another day.

scrubjay on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM

If she spent 6 million and had 1 million left, I don’t have a big problem with this as of yet. If she had been left with zero in the account, then was faced with legal challenges and then lost the election anyway, she could’ve ended up owing a large sum of money as well as losing the election.
A million dollars can go fast in politics.

JellyToast on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM

Just because Mike Castle was a turd doesn’t mean O’Donnell didn’t stink.

Bill C on December 3, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Laconic.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM

Good grief. And if the campaign ended up a million in the hole it would’ve been another story.

The O’Donnell detractors are fascinating. They just can’t let it go.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Its the hypocrisy of her complaining for the NRSC to give her money when she had all this money that she was sitting on. Its a lady who drives a Mercedes to the grocery store to use her food stamps kinda deal.

Raisedbywolves on December 3, 2010 at 9:58 PM

You asked, so I shall answer…from a fundraising and campaign standpoint this is an absolute disaster… all of the money should have been spent…yes, ALL of it…with her high profile the debt… win or lose …would have easily been covered by donations post-election…

DCJeff on December 3, 2010 at 10:03 PM

I’m outraged!

Kensington on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Alas, alas, alas. California, we are doomed.

John the Libertarian on December 3, 2010 at 9:06 PM

I’m going to take an educated guess and say that between Whitman, Fiorina, and all other statewide candidates, the CA GOP raised and spent somewhere in the $200-250 million range. And for all this spending, the CA GOP has only the following:

19 Congressmen
28 Assemblymen (a loss of 1, I might add!)
14 State Senators

At some point and time, someone in the CA GOP is going to have to come to the conclusion that the party would likely get the same results by both spending only 1/4 the cash, and by letting the Chuck DeVores of the party do the statewide races.

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Remember those three 30-minute spots she arranged on the final day of the campaign? It seems like she tried to spend a lot of her remaining funds that day, but wasn’t allowed.

joe_doufu on December 3, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Exit question: Could the NRSC really have helped her?

Jesus Christ on steroids stuffing a ballot box couldn’t have helped her.

JohnGalt23 on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 PM

athenadelphi on December 3, 2010 at 9:34 PM

If Crazy Christine is ever going to run again, it’s going to be someplace outside Delaware. I’m thinking that there’s an Orange County US House seat with her name on it, should she get some job offer out in L.A. (which she likely would)

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 PM

A COD victory would have bode poorly for the beltway elites

The GOP filed a complaint on her?

This was strategic sabotage

she could have won with help from the party instead she recieved derision

anytime I heard her speak she sounded informed and thoughtful and a threat to DC elites

for whatever reason she was aborted

Sonosam on December 3, 2010 at 10:28 PM

canopfor on December 3, 2010 at 9:45 PM

All Crazy Christine did was give voice to the hopes of a LOT OF PEOPLE on the Right when it comes to Hillary. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:29 PM

Seeing that she had large ad buys bumped from local media at the last minute, I’m not surprised that the dirty tricks left her with unspent campaign funds.

cthulhu on December 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM

I love Whitman and her story of success. I can’t help thinking her kids are not too happy with her now – blowing their inheritance.

sherry on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 PM

Please. She’ll make that $140 million back in three years (less if interest rates rise).

JohnGalt23 on December 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM

and by letting the Chuck DeVores of the party do the statewide races.

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Chuck Devore was never going to win the GOP primary, no matter how much money he had or didn’t have.
The man is creepy and the voters didn’t like him.

Jenfidel on December 3, 2010 at 10:31 PM

She should have spent the money on the campaign. I’m assuming that’s why people gave it her in the first place. As for legal challenges, etc. she could raise money after the fact or use profits from any appearances, interviews, and book deals. And none of this would be a big deal if she hadn’t complained about the NRSC and claimed she needed the money.

Deanna on December 3, 2010 at 10:31 PM

Money well spent, for sure.

LOLz

Good Lt on December 3, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Hasn’t that ditz O’Donnell (I’m not a witch, I’m you”) taken a job yet as a cocktail waitress in Atlantic City?

Hilts on December 3, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Jenfidel on December 3, 2010 at 10:31 PM

The point being this: If the big money is getting you poor results, cut your losses and let those who generate more enthusiasm than cash be the nominee. After all, those sort of candidates are more likely to try creative things to get attention, and for all his faults, Chuck DeVore was more than willing to try creative things.

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:40 PM

Regardless of what you think of her as a candidate, I find ending with 1 mil on a campaign of that size easily acceptable.

Let’s suppose she got close. The Battle Royale of a recount would follow and easily burn that mil and more.

Additionally, I see the period between election and actually taking office as part and parcel of the campaign, there are expenses associated with media appearances, setting up more permanent local offices in the district and similar tasks that are required to be effective.

Jason Coleman on December 3, 2010 at 11:02 PM

Let’s suppose she got close.

That’s all her fans can do these days.

Good Lt on December 3, 2010 at 11:03 PM

Remember those three 30-minute spots she arranged on the final day of the campaign?

You mean the spots she tried to run but the station bumped her once and I also believe they tried a “we forgot” excuse.

She did have multiple decks stacked against her.

Jason Coleman on December 3, 2010 at 11:04 PM

Let’s suppose she got close.

That’s all her fans can do these days.

Good Lt on December 3, 2010 at 11:03 PM

I’ll just point out that a campaign plans to win, and must plan accordingly.

Jason Coleman on December 3, 2010 at 11:05 PM

I’ll just point out that a campaign plans to win, and must plan accordingly.

Jason Coleman on December 3, 2010 at 11:05 PM

Surely.

I’ll counter with the point that sometimes, polling trends are indicative, no matter what we want to believe.

Good Lt on December 3, 2010 at 11:09 PM

The point being this: If the big money is getting you poor results, cut your losses and let those who generate more enthusiasm than cash be the nominee.

BradSchwartze on December 3, 2010 at 10:40 PM

You should have ended your Devore thoughts there.
He didn’t win the GOP primary and he would have lost the general (even worse than Fiorina, who came very close to winning).
Devore’s numbers never got out of the ‘teens no matter what he did.

Jenfidel on December 3, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Jen hit the nail on the head in the comments section. Allah, give the credit where its due or else you’re a beta for life:

This article is missing one key piece of information:

What is the normal amount of money for a campaign to have left-over after an election?

Without that information, we really don’t know if this is out of the ordinary or just reported as if it were out of the ordinary.

It sounds as if the campaign has legitimate reasons for reserving at least some of the cash – to pay for any legal services needed afterwards and to pay for the required FEC filings – so, I’m not sure what the scandal is.

Anyone on HotAir have a better idea of how much money is usually needed post-election by a candidate?

JadeNYU on December 3, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Zetterson on December 3, 2010 at 11:23 PM

What is she going to do with the money that was donated?

PappyD61 on December 3, 2010 at 11:24 PM

Jen is supposed to be Jade

Zetterson on December 3, 2010 at 11:24 PM

Its the hypocrisy of her complaining for the NRSC to give her money when she had all this money that she was sitting on. Its a lady who drives a Mercedes to the grocery store to use her food stamps kinda deal.

Raisedbywolves on December 3, 2010 at 9:58 PM

I don’t think the complaint was all about money alone from the NRSC. As with a lot of commenters here there was a general pissed-off feeling that Sure Winner Mike was denied the opportunity to, well, win and hand those precious committee chairs to the GOP — although of course Sure Winner Mike wouldn’t have put the GOP over the top anyway, and probably would’ve voted with the Democrats frequently…

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 12:02 AM

At least Whitman spent 141 Million to come in 2nd. Romney spent that and came in 3rd 4th…

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:04 AM

As for the NRSC helping or not helping CO’D with enough ads/money/etc., maybe the NRSC and the NRCC could’ve helped in other ways, like to secure a congratulatory statement and an endorsement from the Rove backed Castle after his primary loss…

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:08 AM

maybe the NRSC and the NRCC could’ve helped in other ways, like to secure a congratulatory statement and an endorsement from the Rove backed Castle after his primary loss…

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:08 AM

Squishes supporting conservatives? Where’d you get that silly notion? ;) You know it’s always supposed to be the other way around.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 12:13 AM

But yet Whitman and Fiorina weren’t.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Except they actually had a reasonable chance at winning and were respected, accomplished individuals.

O’Donnell never had a prayer, was a horrible candidate, and thoroughly embarrassed herself and the tea party.

WisCon on December 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM

She’s got bills to pay…jeeez.

Corruption about Obama and Democrats getting tiring?

b1jetmech on December 4, 2010 at 12:26 AM

Except they actually had a reasonable chance at winning and were respected, accomplished individuals.

WisCon on December 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM

They had a reasonable chance at winning? Bud, if someone loses to a lousy 70s retread like Jerry Brown, they never had a prayer.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 12:27 AM

^ And didn’t Whitman lose by something like 13 points? Ouch. Yeah, I’d say she had a good shot.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 12:32 AM

Looking up the results, Fiorina lost by 10 points to Boxer. Another ouch. They were both skunked almost as badly as O’Donnell. They really brought shame to the moderates.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 12:44 AM

I’ll admit that some of that is MINE. I gave to her in small quantities. Part of me is glad that she now has the money to do something with her life that is legitimate – like start a business, gain some gravitas, and then RUN IN 2014. Perfection.

athenadelphi on December 3, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Sucker.

I guess some people have money to burn.

By the way, given this 40-something woman’s past history, I believe only the last part of your Three-Step Christine O’Donnell Self-Improvement Program (“RUN IN 2014″) is actually likely to occur.

I hope you’ll still feel like you got your money’s worth.

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 12:48 AM

I hope you’ll still feel like you got your money’s worth.

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 12:48 AM

I’m very proud of the $50 I gave to Crazy Christine, and I’d do it again. Provided she find some other place besides Delaware to run for elective office.

And frankly, looking at the shot of her, ABC/Disney could score a ratings coup if they hired Crazy Christine as a regular political commentator.

BradSchwartze on December 4, 2010 at 12:55 AM

Always thought anger with the NRSC had as much to do that Big Tent loyalty thing that only flows one-way — to RINOs.

Feedie on December 4, 2010 at 12:56 AM

Except they actually had a reasonable chance at winning and were respected, accomplished individuals.

O’Donnell never had a prayer, was a horrible candidate, and thoroughly embarrassed herself and the tea party.

WisCon on December 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM

Ok, then why did an institution such as Castle lose? I mean, if CO’D was such a horrible candidate why did the voters in the Republican primary chose her over a state institution? Where/are the primary voters horrible, stupid people?

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:57 AM

Where = were…Preview is my friend

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:59 AM

Where = were…Preview is my friend
Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 12:59 AM

You had me going there for a minute. Thought I’d missed out on some new hipster code on the Internet.

Feedie on December 4, 2010 at 1:18 AM

Good grief. And if the campaign ended up a million in the hole it would’ve been another story.

The O’Donnell detractors are fascinating. They just can’t let it go.

ddrintn on December 3, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Yes, it would have been another story, and well it should have been.

Spend the money you need, but don’t spend more than you have.

It’s not a difficult concept is it?

Countless candidates manage it. Outside the world of politics millions of businesses, families, etc., do the same.

It’s called “having a budget”.

But apparently it was foreign concept for Christine O’Donnell, and her campaign.

Why am I not surprised?

By the way, this clown O’Donnell not only lost by 16 in Delaware, she made races in nearby PA (and I would argue, all along the east coast) a lot closer than they had to be
because people identified good conservative candidates like Toomey and others, with her antics, costing Northeastern conservatives a good chunk of indy votes.

And you can’t compare Fiorina and Whitman to O’Donnell, because A) they didn’t lose by as much; B) they were accomplished successful people who brought credit to the Republican/conservative brand; and C) it is necessary for the Republican Party to run serious campaigns in California. You can’t just cede the largest state in the Union to the Democratic Party without a fight. Even if it costs a lot of money.

Flushing millions down the drain on a no-chance clown like O’Donnell, in a non-crucial state like Delaware, is obviously a very different situation.

All the big O’Donnell pushers on this board were haranguing those of us who warned about this idiot, with cries of Traitor, RINO, whiner, etc.

Now that her crappy candidacy has blown up in your faces, you’re all doing plenty of whining yourselves. Or else denying the obvious. Or both. Obviously the truth hurts.

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 1:21 AM

Yes, it would have been another story, and well it should have been.

Spend the money you need, but don’t spend more than you have.

It’s not a difficult concept is it?

Countless candidates manage it. Outside the world of politics millions of businesses, families, etc., do the same.

It’s called “having a budget”.

But apparently it was foreign concept for Christine O’Donnell, and her campaign.

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 1:21 AM

Uh, I think the story is that O’Donnell’s campaign ended up with a million-dollar surplus. Which would entail NOT spending money you don’t have. So it must not have been that foreign a concept.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 1:37 AM

Feedie on December 4, 2010 at 1:18 AM

It’s the higher math, gets me every time…

Gohawgs on December 4, 2010 at 1:39 AM

By the way, this clown O’Donnell not only lost by 16 in Delaware, she made races in nearby PA (and I would argue, all along the east coast) a lot closer than they had to be

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 1:21 AM

Oh, b.s. Toomey never had an overwhelming lead. That race was going to be close even is Saint Michael of Castle had won.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 1:39 AM

And you can’t compare Fiorina and Whitman to O’Donnell, because A) they didn’t lose by as much;

Dreadnought on December 4, 2010 at 1:21 AM

As I pointed out, Whitman lost by 13 and Fiorina lost by 10. Not that far behind O’Donnell’s loss margin, and they didn’t have the Republican ankle-biting pack after them either.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 1:43 AM

Oh, b.s. Toomey never had an overwhelming lead.

Christine O’Donnell hurt Toomey… you’re an idiot if you don’t think so. She hurt a lot of people.

The O’Donnell detractors are fascinating. They just can’t let it go.

Bwahahahahahaha…. the O’Donnell supporters are fascinating… how can they still be so stupid?

Listen, I reluctantly support Castle… and my support of him has been vindicated in so many different ways.

ninjapirate on December 4, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Christine O’Donnell hurt Toomey… you’re an idiot if you don’t think so. She hurt a lot of people.

So by that logic, Whitman and Fiorina hurt Rossi and Buck.

Listen, I reluctantly support Castle… and my support of him has been vindicated in so many different ways.

ninjapirate on December 4, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Vindicated how? That we lost a golden opportunity to have another Snowe in the Senate? He wasn’t a guaranteed win anyway.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 1:59 AM

ninjapirate on December 4, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Then take it up with the Republicans of Delaware. This has been my argument all along. The nomination of Christine O’Donnell never made sense in that state but once she is the candidate, she should have been supported. Just another tale of bad choices.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2010 at 2:03 AM

but once she is the candidate, she should have been supported.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2010 at 2:03 AM

Just as we were expected to shut up and get behind sure-loser McCain. That sort of thing only seems to work one way.

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 2:11 AM

ddrintn on December 4, 2010 at 2:11 AM

I will admit to being underwhelmed with our choices in 2008 but I don’t think anything could stop the guilt of the nation election. The choosing of Gov. Palin as VP and the reaction of certain areas of the Republican party have been edifying, to say the very least. If you can’t say anything else about Sen. McCain, the man knows his weaknesses.

Cindy Munford on December 4, 2010 at 2:20 AM

Whitman and Fiorina in polling seemed to have a shot. Whitman got blindsided by the illegal nanny incident (which was really unfair), and Carly didn’t close. With LA district schools (?) being mostly Hispanic now, and the uh, beginning of illegals campaigning for Senators (*cough Patty Murray in WA cough*), I’m surprised they didn’t lose by more.

Besides, CA is in ‘my head is in the sand’ mode… they can’t admit their problems because then they’d actually have to try and fix them.

Someone on O’Reilly to-night said CA debt is now being partly underwritten by the Federal Govt… is that right?

linlithgow on December 4, 2010 at 4:23 AM

Comment pages: 1 2