Mitt “the money man” Romney raises $18.25 million in three months
posted at 11:05 am on July 6, 2011 by Tina Korbe
In fundraising, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney this quarter likely surpassed all his rivals for the GOP presidential nomination. His campaign today announced it raised $18.25 million in the past three months, more than half of which was garnered through a one-day phone bank fundraiser held in Las Vegas on May 16.
That places Romney ahead of any of the other GOP contenders who have so far reported their fundraising totals for the second quarter. The next closest — Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) — posted an unimpressive $4.5 million. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty reported an anemic $4.2 million, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman a meager $4.1 million (half of which was his own money), former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain a tiny $2.46 million and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, already deep in debt, just $2 million. But not everyone running has revealed fundraising sums yet. Rep. Michelle Bachmann’s (R-Minn.) campaign, for example, will announce her fundraising numbers July 15.
Still, Bachmann seems unlikely to pass Romney in the second-quarter contest for campaign cash, although she’s likely to outdo the others. Romney has, after all, always been a prodigious fundraiser. In his first bid for the GOP presidential nomination four years ago, for example, he raised $65.1 million and also coughed up $42.3 million of his own money for a campaign loan. Notably, Romney didn’t contribute any of his own money to the fundraising numbers he reported today.
Romney’s also boosted by the help of “Restore the Future,” a super political action committee organized by his former advisers to help him win the nomination. The SuperPAC announced Tuesday it has already brought in $12 million in the first six months.
So, what does all the money mean? The obvious, of course: Romney so far remains the frontrunner for the nomination, with support in all 50 states and the nation’s capital (as the campaign was quick to point out). His campaign finance chairman offered this explanation in a statement: “Voters are responding to Mitt Romney’s message that President Obama’s policies have failed and that we need new leadership in Washington.”
Romney especially has hammered away at Obama’s failed economic policies, drawing some criticism for saying simultaneously that Obama “made the economy worse” and that the nation is in “an anemic recovery” (as though it’s impossible for the two to be simultaneously true!). In a primary sense, it seems to be working: Romney continues to lead in the polls, with a new WMUR-TV poll showing him with a whopping lead of 20 points in New Hampshire.
Rhetorically, Romney seems to already be geared up for the general election, which is just as well, as Obama’s three-month fundraising totals are expected to be in the $60 million range. Of course, as The Fix’s Chris Cillizza has pointed out, it’s not fair to compare primary fundraising with reelection fundraising for a variety of reasons, but, still, that forbidding figure should serve as a reminder to all the GOP candidates as to who they’re really campaigning against and what it will take to win.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Sigh: Indiana man faces possible jail time for nursing bald eagle back to health
GOP: Yeah, about that “relatively minor” and completely underhanded carbon-rule change…
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: « Previous 1 2
1) Take a deeper look at the numbers — the sum of current candidates polling % barely makes 50%. Where’s the other 50%.
2) Compare the polling and donations to 2000, 2004 & 2008
3) Evaluate the impact of Whig Party Platform of 1856 (What Mittens seeks to emulate) & Republican Platform of 1856 on the 1856 & 1860 election cycles
4) Reassess your notion that it must be Romney 2012 all the way
Bottomline, there are millions of fed-up and taxed enough folks that intend to withhold their support until they find someone they can get behind that will turn the ship around.
Mittens with his support for RomneyCare, AGW, Cap-n-trade and ticklefests with Obama will not cut it and the longer he flip-flops around, the more irrelevant he becomes – just as the Whigs passed into history in 1860. Meanwhile, conservatives & TP’ers are actually closer in spirit to the founding documents of the Republican Party.
Learn from history or get steamrolled by it
AH_C on July 6, 2011 at 4:40 PM
I voted for Reagan and served under him. Mittens is no Reagan and isn’t fit to dust off his Stetson, let alone rub Little Man down.
AH_C on July 6, 2011 at 4:44 PM
It’s a challenging time to raise money, given the economy. This campaign season also got off to a much slower start for the candidates, as well as donors. But you are wrong that it’s “small potatoes.”
The total from 2007 included a personal donation. This total does not. It’s all money raised from donors and it’s also all primary money. The cash-on-hand total is also emblematic of a much more efficient operation than the one in 2007. The burn rate was higher back then.
Also, that $12.6 million cash-on-hand added to the $12 million being reported by a super PAC means that there’s a total reserve of around $25 million in the bank aimed at helping his primary bid. They are in a much stronger position financial position right now than the one we we found ourselves in when I was on the 2008 campaign.
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM
It’s now clear why you called Sarah Palin a “moron”.
darwin on July 6, 2011 at 5:01 PM
So AH_C but please back up you claims. Here are some facts to clear up your apparent confusion.
http://whyromney.com/
http://mittromneycentral.com/on-the-issues/
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 5:02 PM
Sorry that post was quoting this:
http://mittromneycentral.com/
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 5:04 PM
What? This sounds pretty perverted not sure if that was your intention or not. So tell me AH_C who is the best choice? I mean if I were looking at resumes for who to hire to fix our countries problems, I really don’t see anyone more qualified with real life experience and the amount of education prior to that than Mitt Romney.
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM
You probably have a much better view of the differences than I do. However, to an outsider like me, there appear to be a lot of similarities to Romney’s 2007 and 2011 fundraising:
He’s trying to raise enough to be the prohibitive favorite, but IMO he’s not quite succeeding. As I’ve stated earlier, he’s likely the frontrunner for the nomination at this point, but I think he’s definitely vulnerable.
cs89 on July 6, 2011 at 5:15 PM
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM
“Little Man” was Reagan’s horse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reagan_with_horse.jpg
Hey, maybe someone should ask Romney about “Little Man” if he starts speechifying about Reagan… just to see his reaction…
cs89 on July 6, 2011 at 5:18 PM
Romney, the “generic Republican”, who publicly stands for nothing (except RomneyCare, AGW and numerous flip-flops) is getting tons of cash from donors who support his candidacy. Since these donors are NOT donating in favor of Reaganomics, or building a Korean style DMZ along the border with perpetually bad neighbor Mexico and then kicking out every freakin’ illegal no matter how long it takes, or bombing every freaking Muslim country into the stone age (ok, they are already there but you know what I mean), what are they donating FOR when Mitt stands for nothing? Seems to me they are buying influence for future pork, earmarks, access, appointments, favorable regulation at the expense of other groups, persons, free markets.
Am I cynical, paranoid or the ultimate realist?
JimP on July 6, 2011 at 5:23 PM
He isn’t Reagan but he is better than what we have.
IlikedAUH2O on July 6, 2011 at 5:42 PM
The media seems to like him.
darwin on July 6, 2011 at 5:49 PM
Introspection is the pathway to a healthy mind. Glad to see you questioning your own motives.
Baby steps. Baby steps.
Soon you can throw that pacifier away too.
Geochelone on July 6, 2011 at 5:57 PM
carefull your Mitt love is showing again…..
unseen on July 6, 2011 at 6:10 PM
So who is succeeding IYO? He is raising more than anyone else who has reported, so I am confused as to who you feel is the GOP frontrunner.
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 6:15 PM
Schadenfreude on July 6, 2011 at 6:16 PM
Gotta have core principles, first…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:20 PM
Sarc must not translate into Swedish…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:27 PM
What? No policy wonk? No Mid-West Governor? No…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:30 PM
The revised, paperback version?…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:34 PM
Really? What’s Mitt gonna do if he’s standing across from the obmanation and the Won thanks him for laying the groundwork for obamacare, hide under the podium as he mostly did for 2 years?…What’s Mitt gonna do if he’s standing across from the obamanation and the economy is brought up, say “it’s worse, I mean it’s anemic, I mean it could be better, I mean it not his fault, I mean”?…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:45 PM
So much to parse…
btw, do you make the same spamming comment to everyone that has a name link or just kj?
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:49 PM
Fund raising for the declared candidates seem to be “down” across the board. By stating a goal of $50 Million, and not reaching that goal, Mitt set himself up for negative press. Throw in that he missed his stated goal by 63% and it appears worse for Mitt, even though — at this point — he’s the fund raising leader…The SuperPAC can’t be included in his totals, it still would be short of his stated goal, because if the SuperPAC numbers are included then PACs associated with other candidates and/or movements should be included. And, they won’t be…
Gohawgs on July 6, 2011 at 8:58 PM
All that money can’t fix ORomney’s lack of principles…or change him from a noballs squish to a real contender.
SurferDoc on July 6, 2011 at 9:05 PM
Yea. Remember how the media loved McCain until he got in the way of the Anointed One?
Then he became the slimiest right wing bigot in history.
It would have been amusing except for the eight plagues which were then visited upon the nation based upon the election results of 2008.
IlikedAUH2O on July 6, 2011 at 9:27 PM
RINO squish…
Roy Rogers on July 6, 2011 at 9:38 PM
Good Point. Mitts position is indefensible; on that RomneyCare thing, and on many other levels. One well placed comment in a debate and the east wing of his mansion fractures like a house of glass.
Geochelone on July 6, 2011 at 10:51 PM
Then perhaps you should deal with your obsession with me? You have become creepy.
csdeven on July 6, 2011 at 11:37 PM
brysonmull on July 6, 2011 at 6:15 PM
As I noted in the comment you quoted, I think Romney is the frontrunner, but is vulnerable.
He has raised the most. It appears that he has not raised as much as he anticipated/hoped. It is my opinion that he has raised significant funds, but not significantly more than last cycle, and not enough to demonstrate to the competition that they are being vastly outperformed and have little hope of overtaking him.
He wanted to put it away, and lap the other competitors in the money primary to (IMO, again) compensate for lack of charisma/passion, and the fact that he is more of a moderate than a natural fit for the conservative base of the GOP.
He’s the frontrunner, but can be overtaken, is my opinion. We’ll have to wait and see how the race develops.
cs89 on July 7, 2011 at 2:17 AM
Even if by some miracle Romneycare beat ObaMao in the general election he would not even steer the ship of state back to center.
NO MORE RINOs!!
Slowburn on July 7, 2011 at 7:48 AM
cs89 on July 7, 2011 at 2:17 AM
Thanks for explaining your opinion in more detail, I can see where you are coming from but I think you missed the point of the quote I provided. The gist from what I gathered was that the last time around everyone was getting more donations and this time whether it is a worse economy or more folks holding onto their money the fundraising isn’t going as well as last time. So the fact Romney still brought in close to his goal of $20 million and so far 5 times more than anyone else who has reported let alone the additional $25 million he has available does trump the field. I think if Bachman was proud of her quarter she would have already reported so, but I guess we will see on the 15th.
For those with issues with and think somehow RomneyCare is a handicap please read this article:
http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Mitt-Romneys-Health-Care-Advantage-David-French-05-17-2011?offset=0&max=1
brysonmull on July 7, 2011 at 11:21 AM
How is Romney a RINO? Please articulate anything on the topic to back up your claim.
brysonmull on July 7, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Can any of the Romney haters actually back up their comments with facts? I mean you spout the reasons you don’t like Romney and yet so far I have not seen any links or actual examples as to why. It appears to me that either you are really not a conservative are a merely here trying to cast doubts no the guy who could beat Obama. Or you are supporting another candidate and are jealous that your person can’t keep up with the fundraising.
brysonmull on July 7, 2011 at 12:13 PM
For my part, I’m hoping either Palin or Perry (or both!) will jump in. Sarahpac hasn’t announced numbers yet, but it will likely be less than Romney, but more than several other candidates (pure guesswork). Perry doesn’t have any numbers to announce, but if he does run I think he could give Romney a literal “run for the money.”
If neither jump in over the next few weeks (highly unlikely, IMO) I’ll have to evaluate who to support as the primaries/caucuses actually get close.
cs89 on July 7, 2011 at 2:54 PM
Official spin for RomneyCare vs ObamaCare debate once Mittens gets the nomination
What Romney did is very different from ObamaCare.
1.Taxation for individuals and business were not raised in Romneycare.
2. Romney did not take money from Medicare to pay for his plan (not that he could have as a governor, but still). Many seniors are unhappy that their Medicare is being cut back to fund benefits for immigrants, especially illegals.
3. Romney did not include, nor try to include, nor did he ever support a “public option”.
4. Romney did not increase spending by a trillion dollars like Obamacare did.
5. Romney did not force price controls on the insurance industry.
6. Romney’s legislation took up only 70 pages. Obama’s is a 2,000 page monstrosity of regulation and bureaucracy.
7. Romney’s plan was specifically for Massachusetts, a wealthy state that already had a much lower portion of the uninsured than the USA as a whole.
8. Romney balanced the budget before attempting to reform health care.
9. Romney’s plan was had broad backing in Massachusetts. The President knew Obamacare was widely detested and rammed it through anyway.
10. Massachusetts had a very liberal legislature, with so few Republicans it could have passed a far-left, socialist style bill and simply overriden Romney’s veto. Thanks to Romney’s actions, what happened in Massachusetts is much more conservative and free market oriented than what would have happened if he had not been around, or had postured for perfection or nothing and gotten nothing.
By contrast, because of Obama’s actions, the nation as a whole has a health care policy that is much more liberal and government-run than would have been the case had he not been around, or not been so determined to push his plan through.
11. Romney is not trying to push his Massachusetts plan on the whole country. He favors local reforms, with each state doing what it believes works best there.
Pawlenty, the new Lunesta on July 7, 2011 at 4:38 PM
Here is another article to read on RomneyCare vs. ObamaCare
brysonmull on July 8, 2011 at 10:59 AM
http://mittromneycentral.com/2011/07/07/a-healthcare-analogy-about-romneycare-and-obamacare/
brysonmull on July 8, 2011 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2