Obama edges Romney in August fundraising

posted at 8:41 am on September 10, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama’s fundraising bounced back in a big way last month.  After three straight months of getting bested by the Mitt Romney/RNC fundraising juggernaut, Team Obama and the DNC managed to score a narrow victory in August.  Moments after Team Romney announced that they had raised $111.6 million — their best month yet — Team Obama announced they had raised $114 million:

President Barack Obama and Democrats raised more than $114 million for his campaign in August, a campaign official says.

The total far exceeds Obama’s earlier monthly fundraising totals. He trailed Mitt Romney and Republicans in fundraising in July for the third straight month.

As Politico’s James Hohmann points out in his Morning Score e-mail, that still leaves out a key indicator, emphasis mine:

President Obama raised $114 million last month, and Mitt Romney took in $111.6 million. Romney’s campaign, including the RNC and state parties it raises money through, have about $168.5 million cash on hand. The Obama camp has not announced how much they have. Boston announced their numbers at midnight, and Chicago responded with theirs at 12:22. Chicago is highlighting that they had 1.1 million donors last month, including 317 thousand new ones. The Romney camp is highlighting that 94 percent (or 822,223) of their donations were for $250 or less, accounting for $34.6 million of his haul. Chicago says 98 percent of Obama’s donations were for $250 or less, and that the average gift was $58.

During the summer, the burn rate for Team Obama has exceeded 100%; they have spent more money than they have raised.  Romney, on the other hand, has continually added to his cash on hand.  For the first time this year, that was also true of Team Romney in August, as they spent $17 million more than they raised. The fundraising for Team Obama got very aggressive in August, filled with wheedling, cajoling, and dire predictions of catastrophe.  To some extent, that seems to have worked despite getting some bad press over it.

Even so, at least at the moment it appears that Romney will continue to enjoy a cash-on-hand lead at the official start of the general-election fight, even if Obama managed to achieve parity for a month on the top-line figure.


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

Now who’s being delusional. I don’t think Latinos will vote at 80%. In 2008 they voted for Obama at 67%, I suspect that in 2012 they will vote for Obama in the low 70s. Perhaps 72%. Why don’t you run that model of yours again with a 72% Obama latino vote.

libfreeordie on September 10, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

msupertas on September 10, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Obama’s poor fund raising previously was argued as evidence of the lack of support he had. Now what are you all arguing? The crony capitalism that Obama and Romney both draw money to them.

astonerii on September 10, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Who should conservatives trust more mnjg or Scott Rasmussen?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

libfreeordie on September 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM

What you are looking at is a post convention bounce for Obama which is already fading. Go back a week into ancient history. Rasmussen had Romney up by 3 or 4, RCP had the candidates tied for the first time in a year and Gallup had Obama’s approval at 44% after falling all summer. Those numbers are dire and not electable. And all this after the summer of slander, with Romney piling up the cash and starting to unleash his ad campaign right now. This is when the Romney campaign starts and he can start eating into Obama’s lead in minorities and consolidate the white vote. This election will be like 2010, not 2008. Enthusiasm will be on the right. You can’t talk away dire jobs reports like the one we just had and GDP growth less than 2%. People won’t vote for the incumbent if they don’t have a job; we have 23 million unemployed which is a national disgrace as Clint Eastwood said and Latinos and blacks are heavily over represented in the ranks of the unemployed. Obama may have put on a good show with his celebs and “war on women” and Bill Clinton, the celebrity misogynist par excellence but if he has a brain and a mouth and can connect the two, Romney will expose him mercilessly in the debates.

breffnian on September 10, 2012 at 10:06 AM

While we’re at it, why don’t we run it with 100% latino, 100% black, 100% LGBT, 100% Jew, 100% muslim.

Thanks to bigotry, the 100% black vote for Obama is not that far off.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Benny and the boys at the empty chair’s back pocket, also known as the treasury dept, want to crank up the presses again and prove our point one more time. Keep trying the same thing over and over, you know the rest. How low can my bond fund go, Benny? Maybe Bar has contracted to pick up any spillage. How’s that for some free money. Better call the store and order more ammo and freeze dried food.

Kissmygrits on September 10, 2012 at 10:09 AM

The leftists are in a panic and are squeezing their contributors in the face of an impending disaster.

rplat on September 10, 2012 at 9:49 AM

My thought exactly
The news has been full of panicky Democrats begging rich gay donors and others to pony up.
Seems to have worked.

breffnian on September 10, 2012 at 10:10 AM

While we’re at it, why don’t we run it with 100% latino, 100% black, 100% LGBT, 100% Jew, 100% muslim.

Thanks to bigotry, the 100% black vote for Obama is not that far off.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 10:07 AM

I know, but somehow whites are the racists.
O/T….Look at Drudge’s site. Do you want those losers teaching your kids? Time for some replacement teachers. Probably better results.

msupertas on September 10, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Some people here are just as selfish as Akin. Some of you just don’t see the bigger picture.

“If you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you, you’re on the other side.”

It’s that simple.

jazzmo on September 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM

I hate to encourage the birthers and other paranoid loons, but I wonder in a non-paranoid sort of way how much of Obama’s money comes from people who are hostile to America? Either from the treasury of hostile governments or citizens of hostile governments who think Obama is not in the interest of America?

thuja on September 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Gallup has Obama +6 50-44 and Rasmussen has Obama +5 50-45.

Not looking good.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Gallup has Obama +6 50-44 and Rasmussen has Obama +5 50-45.

Not looking good.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Yea, I know. They also had Carter +8 against Reagan in Sept and Dukakis +17 against Bush in Sept. How did that work out?

msupertas on September 10, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Gallup has Obama +6 50-44 and Rasmussen has Obama +5 50-45.

Not looking good.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM

I think it’s 49-44% Gallup.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Liberal rich people are secretly part of the 99%. They actually feel quite guilty about having so much while so many other people have so little.

Bishop on September 10, 2012 at 10:01 AM

But not quite guilty enough to spend their own money to do something about it.

Night Owl on September 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM

I don’t know… I just don’t buy it. Is there any chance that this is being fudged, like the polls in the last few days that are on top of every MSM news source that show Zero with a bounce?

I think it just doesn’t seem likely. Anyone else think they could be simply lying, like with everything else?

Dirty Creature on September 10, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Want some good news?

Even though Obama has taken a 5 point lead in the nationwide, it’s 47-47 with leaners in Ras’ swing state poll. So Obama’s bounce is occurring mostly in states that won’t decide the election. In swing states, it’s a weak bounce. And Romney’s ad blitz just started.

This could very well be a replay of 2000 where we win the electoral vote and lose the popular vote as it stands right now.

But Obama’s bounce will soon start it’s downward trend back to reality soon. It’s not where the bounce peaks, it where it falls back to that matters.

dforston on September 10, 2012 at 10:41 AM

it’s all Palin’s fault.

renalin on September 10, 2012 at 10:42 AM

I am so close to writing off the people of this country as hopelessly and deliberately ignorant. Second look at Canada, for me.

totherightofthem on September 10, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Some people here are just as selfish as Akin. Some of you just don’t see the bigger picture.

“If you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you, you’re on the other side.”

It’s that simple.

jazzmo on September 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM

This side is extending the socialist state for generations.
This side argues the safety net is a good thing.
This side likes mandates.
This side agreed to the auto bailouts.
This side instigated too big to fail.
This side made the starting point for new legislation just shy of a trillion dollars.
This side is for Romneycare, same as Obamacare, just a different name.
This side is a global warming warmist.
This side picks justices who claim mandates and the punishment for not following them are constitutional.

What is the other side again? Isn’t it just simple two sides of the same coin? When you look at my ideology, which has not changed since around 1988 when I first voted for George Herbert Walker Bush and got back stabbed by him, and the ideology of the two major parties. There is hardly any difference. The only difference I see in the two parties is that R&R wants to make future generations pay for our greed and Obama and company want the rich to do it. I got to say, the RICH are far more culpable for the debt this nation is building than my 15 month old daughter is!

astonerii on September 10, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Want some good news?

Friday’s super duper Obama sample rolls of the tracker tomorrow morning.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Four words : burn rate.

Weight of Glory on September 10, 2012 at 9:01 AM

I get the appeal of making fun of his burn rate, but as long as he has enough to get through November…It doesn’t really matter. Hell, I think Hilary is still in debt on her presidential campaign.

Similarly, having money left in October is not a sign of anything good about a campaign (unless they still won).

ChrisL on September 10, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Instead of Romney just calling the Marxist a nice guy maybe at the first debate Romney should just walk over to the Marxist and kiss his ass. That should be enough to get those ex Marxist voters to vote for Romney.

bgibbs1000 on September 10, 2012 at 10:47 AM

I think it’s 49-44% Gallup.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 10:29 AM

You expect gumbypoked to be honest with facts and figures?

bayview on September 10, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Can we see if the bounce deflates (which it should by mid-week) before we call for drastic measures and start manning the lifeboats.

Reading the comments is depressing. It’s like the liberal trolls have never followed politics before and dont know what a bounce is, and the conservative pessimists and/or ABR’s have never followed politics either and dont know that there are bounces after conventions.

Obama is up by 4 after a bounce, and that should self-correct by the end of the week (go read Erick Erickson’s post from yesterday for a good explanation why). So, conservatives need to calm down and step away from the ledge.

milcus on September 10, 2012 at 10:53 AM

I think Romney could easily outraise Obozo if his web site would work. I tried donating 3 separate times over the last 5 days and each time I tried (using different cards), the web site responded “invalid credit card number”!

Anyone else experience this?

WryTrvllr on September 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM

“I think it’s 49-44% Gallup.”

Today, the lead is up to 50-44.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

milcus on September 10, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Nice post!..Very nice..:)

Dire Straits on September 10, 2012 at 10:57 AM

“Obama is up by 4 after a bounce, and that should self-correct by the end of the week”

And if it doesn’t self correct by the end of the week?

The problem is that the GOP convention was so lame and got no real bounce.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Anyone else experience this?

WryTrvllr on September 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM

NOPE! and just like donating to Obama using a stupid character name, I never will.

astonerii on September 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM

RCP is 48/46 Obama/Romney, so it’s not all that huge of a gap. Still, I’m pretty close to writing people off. It doesn’t help that Romney appears to be actively working to discourage his base, while Obama is working to fire his base up. This could account for the disappearing enthusiasm gap.

totherightofthem on September 10, 2012 at 10:59 AM

NOPE! and just like donating to Obama using a stupid character name, I never will.

astonerii on September 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Oh good. So I’ll just keep at it.

WryTrvllr on September 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Today, the lead is up to 50-44.

gumbypoked on September 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

How can they poke you when you are so full of shat? Gallup releases the daily tracking poll at 1 pm. What you are trying to pass off is Barry’s job approval number, a-hole.

bayview on September 10, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Today, the lead is up to 50-44.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

??? Please provide a link.

Are you privy to the data being released at 1pm ET later today?

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM

the lead has been shifting back and forth on the tracking polls for 2 months.

Get back to me in 2 weeks.

gerrym51 on September 10, 2012 at 11:05 AM

I think Romney could easily outraise Obozo if his web site would work. I tried donating 3 separate times over the last 5 days and each time I tried (using different cards), the web site responded “invalid credit card number”!

Anyone else experience this?

WryTrvllr on September 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Nope…i was actually quite happy that his campaign did such a great job with the online donnation setting…I’m definitely an internaut and not a phone person, I always donate oline and never on phone…that’s why I was grateful that R campaign didn’t bother me crazy with phone calls and stuff, once they got it that my preference for donating was online…i have set my card/account for monthly recurrent payments to his campaign, but I donated extra many times, and my wife did too, and not once we had a problem with their oline donation settings…maybe there was some glitch of sorts when you tried, who kows…

jimver on September 10, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Relax everyone -

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-did-obama-really-win-summer_652093.html

Jay Cost is pretty good. Talk to me at the end of the month. I want to see the vaunted Obama ground game when it counts. I’m not in a swing state, but friends who I have spoken with who are in one haven’t seen much evidence of Obama support.

Until then we are just talking in the wind. Guess what -the dems love Bill – it will fade.

Zomcon JEM on September 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Think swing. It’s all that matters.

gracie on September 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM

gumbypoked on September 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

How can they poke you when you are so full of shat? Gallup releases the daily tracking poll at 1 pm. What you are trying to pass off is Barry’s job approval number, a-hole.

bayview on September 10, 2012 at 11:03 AM

You think that one could tell the difference…his intellect is tiny, can’t retain and process so much info at once, it usually overwhelms it…

jimver on September 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM

You think that one could tell the difference…his intellect is tiny, can’t retain and process so much info at once, it usually overwhelms it…
jimver on September 10, 2012 at 11:08 AM

if he’s paid to spew he might have an inside track…mainly he is irritating.

gracie on September 10, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Gov.Romney a bit of advice .Get the Mr nice guy smile off your face and your butt off NBC.

logman1 on September 10, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I am so close to writing off the people of this country as hopelessly and deliberately ignorant. Second look at Canada, for me.

totherightofthem on September 10, 2012 at 10:43 AM

There’s nothing to contemplate. Go ahead. I came to that conclusion in 2008.

michaelthomas on September 10, 2012 at 11:16 AM

PS. Gallup is registered voters.

gracie on September 10, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Even though Obama has taken a 5 point lead in the nationwide, it’s 47-47 with leaners in Ras’ swing state poll. So Obama’s bounce is occurring mostly in states that won’t decide the election. In swing states, it’s a weak bounce. And Romney’s ad blitz just started.

This. Bill Clinton’s ad for Obama has been playing in wide rotation in the Chicago market – I’ve seen it on cable and the broadcast nets all week and this weekend. I don’t know about other markets that Obama has “sewn up”, but, along with the convention, I attribute this to his bounce in the national poll (keyword is national) as well as his increase in fundraising.

Superimposed over the ad is a plea to text a certain number to contribute $10 to Obama’s campaign. I said in another thread that I can’t find how much he’s made through this ad, but he is spending money in an attempt to raise money. Advertising in the Chicago market ain’t cheap. I’d be curious to see if this ad is also running in other big markets like New York and LA.

Anybody know how much Obama burned through in August? He’s been spending more than he’s been taking in the last few months. If that remains the case, this report doesn’t mean much. What matters is money in the bank at this point.

italianguy626 on September 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Since daily tracking polls began (1988/1992?) has there ever been a case where a candidate led by 5% in early September for so to lose in November?

I suspect you might have to go back to the pre-daily tracking days, maybe 1980. Unfortunately, Romney is no Reagan.

Norwegian on September 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Today’s Gallup numbers are here…

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2507493#.UE4E3o1lSY2

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Romney would be leading by a fair margin (even in the polls) if Obamacare had been struck down. Obama would be made to look like a “loser” and his political philosophy would have lost some popular creedance.

Double thanks again to Justice Roberts.

michaelthomas on September 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Right on cue…

sandee on September 10, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Today’s Gallup numbers are here…

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2507493#.UE4E3o1lSY2

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

READ THE FLUKING ARTICLE!

But his approval rating is already coming back down to earth. It fell from a net +10 Saturday to just a net +6 (50/44) Sunday.

Nothing about trial match-ups, just approval rating.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 11:25 AM

“READ THE FLUKING ARTICLE!

But his approval rating is already coming back down to earth. It fell from a net +10 Saturday to just a net +6 (50/44) Sunday.

Nothing about trial match-ups, just approval rating.”

You’re an idiot. From the article…

“Obama’s Gallup head-to-head numbers followed his approval numbers up, from 47/46 when the convention started, to 50/44 today.”

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM

You’re an idiot. From the article…

“Obama’s Gallup head-to-head numbers followed his approval numbers up, from 47/46 when the convention started, to 50/44 today.”

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Well, it’s a typo on the author’s part. The actual numbers are 49/44.

sentinelrules on September 10, 2012 at 11:31 AM

The natural history of a bounce is up and then down, we shall see.

What? Over? Did you say “over”? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

bayview on September 10, 2012 at 11:33 AM

“Well, it’s a typo on the author’s part. The actual numbers are 49/44.”

Could be. I just took it that he had inside info or had some premium membership (if there is such a thing at Gallup) where he gets info early with more detail, like at Rasmussen.

I apologize for the idiot remark. It was uncalled for.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM

And if it doesn’t self correct by the end of the week?

The problem is that the GOP convention was so lame and got no real bounce.

gumbyandpokey on September 10, 2012 at 10:58 AM

First, the Republican convention could have been the most exciting thing in the history of the world, and you would have still said it was “lame.” And the liberal media would have done the same. It makes no difference to people like you, and the liberal media, what happens. The only narrative is always going to be “Democrat good, Republican bad.” So, please stop pretending you are impartial in any way, shape, or form.

Second, if it doesn’t correct, then it doesn’t correct. However, there seems to be every indication that it should. In most polls Romney still leads independents, the issues that people still care about, Obama still has an awful record on, and history tells us bounces are not sustainabl by themselves, without other underlying realities.

As for the GOP convention, that is where I think the numbers are flawed. Every candidate in the last 65 years has gotten at least a 5 convention bounce. Are we really to believe that Romney is the first candidate in 65 years to have not gotten a 5 point bounce, or if Gallup is to be believed, to have lost 2 points? And Obama, one of the most polarizing political figures ever, got a 5 point bounce? In other words, Bob Dole got a bounce, Walter Mondale got a bounce, Michael Dukakis got a bounce, but Mitt Romney did not?

milcus on September 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

MSUPERTAS you might want to check your reading or research ,Gallup had Dukakis up by 17 in July (
the convention was earlier)not September .. that is a big difference and people make up their minds quicker these days

U2denver on September 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM

The bounce is always strongets for the second convention, not the first, and Romney got some of his bounce with Ryan announcement.

We will watch. Obama is in a bad spot historically. I still would like to hear reports of huge Obama support on the ground – I just don’t see it, nor have I read any stories justifying anyone’s belief that the enthusiasm is there.

Romney is not a rousing figure – and neither was GWHB.

If we continue to see signs of swing state tightening, as well as non-swings tightening – CT,NM for instance – as well as Romney’s lead with independents consistently in the low double digits, this is set up to break for Romney something along the lines of Obama’s victory over McCain in ’08.

Zomcon JEM on September 10, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I don’t watch much network tv, but I did watch Sunday Night Football last night (go Broncos). Mind you I tend to tune out ads or go do something else, but I didn’t notice any Romney ads, but I did see an Obama ad (twice). I live in the swing state of Colorado. So what gives? Where are the ads? When the Broncos play the Steelers in Denver on a Sunday night, the audience would be huge? Where is Romney spending the money? We’ve got less than 60 days to go. Got to get out there fighting.

COgirl on September 10, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Ah yes. I was looking for this news. Thank you, Akin!

Book on September 10, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Obama’s donors are tapped and he’s in debt.

dogsoldier on September 10, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Bounce my *ss. Show me the partisan breakdown.

Hard Right on September 10, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2