Can Gov. Dean simply force the other campaigns into bankruptcy?

[Padraig18]

By all accounts, Governor Dean still has a bank full of cash, with more flowing in every day. He is also not bound by spending limits, as we know. My question is this: if neccessary, can he simply force every campaign except Sen. Kerry's into bankruptcy and win by being the 'last man standing'?

:)

[On the Road]

1. No, But He Needs to Shoot the Moon NOW, in New Hampshire

Spend it all on media in order to squeak out a win. That will stabilize the campaign, he will be the front-runner again, and maybe he can beat the Iowa thing.

[Joe the Revelator]

2. Is that really...

how you want your canidate to get the nomination?

[Padraig18]

5. That's not the question. n/t

[Joe the Revelator]

6. I'm asking though

would you be happy with that and consider it a victory?

[Padraig18]

8. I'm not answering, though.

:)

[Joe the Revelator]

17. Then i'll be forced to take your implied yes...

how is allowing a canidate to "bankrupt" all the other canidates like this is some large scale game of monopoly any better then stealing an election by using the SCOTUS?

[Padraig18]

21. Read it however.

I'm just not playing the 'hijack this thread' game today. :)

[Joe the Revelator]

26. how is that hijacking the thread?

Its a valid concern. If you're going to ask hypothetically if it was possible for Dean to hijack democracy by forcing everyone else into bankruptcy, then you should be prepared to answer weather or not you would be happy with that outcome.

[Padraig18]

29. By positing a new question, instead of addressing the one 1st posited.

:)

[Joe the Revelator]

34. Your orginal topic has been addressed

and now the discussion begins ( hence the purpose of the board). So, i'll ask again, would you or would you not support your canidate winning in this fashion?

[Padraig18]

36. After the Gore-ing he's taken...

... I'm ready to move into the "all's fair in love, war and politics" camp.

[Joe the Revelator]

39. Hey if thats the way you want to win...

as shallow as it would be, the by all means support it. That would probably be the ONLY way i wouldn't vote for dean.

[KittyWampus]

54. Howard Dean Supporters That Refuse To Hold Him Accountable

are pretty much his biggest problem.

A lot of Dean's money was raised by his supporters sending money everytime he screwed something up.

This is like rewarding a child for repeated, inappropriate behavior.

Howard Dean and his campaign have made numberous blunders. His speech was the last straw and largely a result of his supporters blaming everyone else for Dean's past mistakes or their pretending his mistakes didn't happen.

That speech was completely inappropriate behavior.

Dean may have helped forge new ways of raising money on the internet but he cannot expect to forge new attitudes in voters minds about First Ladies making at least a TOKEN show of support in public AND how a Concession Speech should sound.

If Dean keeps spending money with sinking polls he will look like even more of a fool then he did during his "I Have A Scream Speech".

If Dean really cared about the Democrats and this Country he would get out of the race NOW and not prolong the agony.

At some point you have to realise that your "Little Johnnie" will never be a Major League Baseball player and be strong enough to break the news to him. Sometimes you have to be honest even if it is painful or unpleasant. Parents that love their children hold their children accountable- that is the only way they will learn.

[Padraig18]

55. Thank you for contributing.

Have a nice day.

[bearfartinthewoods]

if kerry can raise 400,000 in two days

i think the governor better get out his bat.

[MR. ELECTABLE]

27. A quarter of a million in THREE DAYS? LOL

Dean raised over $330,000 on MONDAY!

[bearfartinthewoods]

48. i corrected the figures

btw...did you know that john mccain raised 500,000.00 in one day, four years ago?

[ryharrin]

56. So what?

Dean raised $1,000,000 in one day last year.

[sandnsea]

64. $500,000 in 36 hours, online

That's what I got in my email.

"Im overwhelmed by the generosity you and others have shown. Over $500,000 in donations have come in online from people all across the nation over the last 36 hours. That puts us fifty percent of the way towards our goal of $1,000,000 in new donations before the New Hampshire primary."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. It would beat voting for a republican war.

As Kerry and Edwards did to get votes.

[XanaDUer]

37. Dean

1. Had no vote to vote,

and

2. Supported Biden-Lugar.

So much for the anti-war candidate.


"Edwards was referring to the speech Dean delivered to California Democrats last weekend, in which he stood at the podium at the party's annual convention in Sacramento and lambasted Edwards and Kerry by name for supporting the war. Dean, who has won a following with his antiwar pronouncements, sought to distinguish himself further by telling the delegates that both of his rivals had refused to stand by their position during their speeches to the crowd. The remark triggered cheers for Dean - even though he would later acknowledge it was wasn't true..."

Link: http://www.topdog04.com/000071.html


AND:


SCHIEFFER: Well, Governor, what, in your mind, would justify a strike on Iraq?

DEAN: Well, first of all, a strike may be justified. What he's got to say, what the president has got to say is that Saddam has atomic or biological weapons and has the means to deliver them to ourselves and our allies. That case -- he has never said that, to my knowledge, nor have any of his surrogates.

Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/30/ftn/printable523726.shtml

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

46. Kerry did vote FOR bush's war. Not answering some hypothetical question.

He and Edwards both cynically gave their OK to the slaughter of thousands of people. People mind you. Not "terrorists", "extremists", or any other appelation so beloved of the killers.

They knew that attacking Iraq would cost thousands of lives yet they gave their OK to it.

They now claim to have been "misled". How pathetic. 23 other senators voted against it. Yet the "heroic" senator caved.

Most of the people of the world were and are outraged at the needless slaughter. It is beyond me how supposed "liberals" can defend men like Kerry and Edwards, and by extension Bush and Rumsfeld.

[creativelcro]

52. Kerry has no political spine, regardless of his military service

[Padraig18]

49. Biden-Lugar didn't pass.

He WOULD have voted for the IWR with the B-L Amendment; that is quite different from voting for the IWR without B-L.

[jmaier]

3. I wouldn't think so.

If certain campaigns have some primary successes, namely Edwards and Clark they will still be able to raise funds up to their campaign limits. While disadvantaged, they won't be bankrupted.

The bigger question is how will Gov Dean fare, regardless of funding? He's had the most money, highest profile, most impressive endorsement list and it hasn't paid off -- yet. Exposure is great for a candidate unless it is negative exposure. The money advantage is important but possibly not decisive.

Given the choice of a stronger candidate (greatest potential appeal to broadest electorate) or greater funds, I'll take the candidate.

Whatever, we are in for a long primary season and that is probably, in balance, a good thing. Keep the rethuglicans guessing, keep media and public interest high and MORE strong voices on the campaign trail blasting Bush.

[JVS]

4. That would be great

[PretzelWarrior]

7. sounds lie you've watched too much "High Stakes Poker" on ESPN

that doesn't sound very productive. It certainly would be a fine blueprint for Bush to beat whichever guy Dems put forward. Not smart thinking. Not smart at all.

Remember? Dean said it's not about him. It's bigger than him. It's a movement. A movement that will inform campaigns of other candidates including the nominee even if it isn't Dean.

[Padraig18]

10. I'm not deluded; it's a hypothetical question. n/t

[Democrats unite]

23. hypothetical questions...

Will only get you hypothetical answers.

[Padraig18]

24. That's fine.

:)

[chocolateeater]

9. He probably could, but it would be too ugly. n/t

[maddezmom]

11. not sure it can happen

John Edward's has his own largesse to use if he wants. Do you know if and when the 4th qtr. numbers are being released? Haven't seen anything official yet, just the campaigns talking. :)

[pscot]

12. Seems doubtful

John Kerry is apparently thinking about selling some paintings to raise money for his campaign. If he can pawn a few Renoirs any time he needs some cash I would guess he's in it for keeps.

[Padraig18]

13. That's why I exempted him.

:)

[pscot]

47. So much for Evelyn Wood

Exception noted.

[Padraig18]

58. 's OK.

:hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Sounds OK to me. Beat the DLC at their own game.

Then we can hear the "moderates" change their tune about "it's just politics". As when they defend the IWR votes of their rollover candidates.

[AP]

15. Do the math. Say he spent 25 mil for 18% of the vote in NH

How much is he going to need to spend to get enough votes to win?

It's like Bush. He had twice as much to spend as Gore, but it only bought him 1 supreme court vote difference.

[Padraig18]

22. $25 million? HUH?

Where did THAT figure come from??? S.W.A.G.?

:wtf:

[AP]

28. "say" = hypothesizing. How much money has he spent so far in the

campaing?

I was assuming that ever peny spent so far by candidates taking IA seriously was to win IA.

I don't know the real numbers.

[Padraig18]

31. OK.

He's spent between 20-22 million, by most estimates, to set up a 50-state campaign that has full-time staff in 27 states so far. That covers everything, to date, leaving him with between $20-22 million (also estimated). That's as much as anyone in the race STARTED with.

[POed_Ex_Repub]

16. I hope that isn't a sound strategy

Because if it is, we'd be in serious trouble in the General election against shrub's bottomless pockets. In this case I don't think it's a matter of money so much as it is image control. Dean has a good platform (good enough where I donated money to him), but he needs to perhaps take advantage of no longer being the frontrunner (ie. taking all the hits). One thing I think Kerry proved, is that a smartly run campaign can put you in a position to win if the timing is right, regardless of finances (within reason).

All things being equal, I hope it's the best message that wins.

[boxster]

19. $2.5 - $3.0 million didn't buy him much in Iowa, so I don't think so.

In a way, Iowa proved that money isn't everything. Dean spent literally millions there and lost by 20%.

Even if money IS everything, I suspect that Clark and maybe Edwards can raise enough money to hang around through the full campaign.

Edit: clarified my response based on the exception of Kerry in the original post.

[no name no slogan]

50. More than that-- more like $7 million

Last I heard Dean spent $7 million in Iowa.

Money cannot buy elections. It can influence them, but it can't buy them.

Gore got outspent by $60 MILLION in 2000, and he still won. Unfortunately for many Democrats we've substituted cash for support. Cash is good, but it can't buy support. It's still all about getting bodies to the polls.

[bicentennial_baby]

61. Or more...

"Here's what we can say: The Dean campaign has spent well in excess of $22 million nationally, including at least $3 million on television advertisements in Iowa alone. Several people familiar with the situation in Iowa, including David Redlawsk, a politically connected Democratic political scientist who tracks the issue, estimate that Dean has also spent more (probably much more than) $3 million — in staff, field operations and direct mail.

Based on other sourcing, we can say that Dean has spent more than $7 million on Iowa. The actual total, if it's ever known, will probably be a lot higher."

http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:Zs64DxPPD-QJ:abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/dailynews/thenote.html+dean+spending+iowa+the+note&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[Feanorcurufinwe]

20. No matter how much he spends, it won't matter if he can't win.

[Julien Sorel]

25. Dean has already demonstrated that he needs

twice the resources to get half the results of the other candidates. So he spends all his money. He's still going to be Dean when he's done spending. The other candidates don't need to match him on a dollar for dollar basis, since they aren't handicapped by carrying around the massive dead weight of being Howard Dean. Yeeeeeeeagh!!! You have the power! Break the bat! Donation paperwork that's taller than I am! World's largest conference call! Rolled up sleeves! Perfect storm! Red face and finger pointing! Let's have a little fun with the Republican wing of the Democratic party! Bush-lite! Confederate flag! King of the wafflers! And on and on and on.

[Blue_Roses]

30. It sounds desperate

"...force every campaign except Sen. Kerry's into bankruptcy and win by being the 'last man standing'?"

[rbrussell]

32. In Short, Yes

...and that's exactly what he'll try if he loses in New Hampshire. If that happens, I expect him to "go long", nearly skip some of the Februrary contests, and concentrate like a laser on New York and California.

But, if no one breaks out in the next week and a half, we're going into 'brokered convention' territory.

[TexasPatriot]

33. question

how much does dean expect to pull in this month?

[Padraig18]

38. No idea.

:shrug:

[TexasPatriot]

62. lets pick a number

say a million a week
Clark is at least on that pace...

so i'd say no

besides, i'm not sure you can spend someone into the ground in the new internet age... but that's a different topic.

Though, considering how much money Clark continues to raise (even in the days just after Iowa) it may be that Clark is the guy with the best ability to raise the big bucks going into the fall. With Dean's unfavorables rising, Clark may be the best monied alternative.

[robcon]

35. How the hell can he do that?

How can Dean 'force' the other campaigns to spend money they don't have? How can he 'force' them into bankruptcy?

Dean can outspend them all, but he can't force anyone to spend money they don't have.

[Padraig18]

40. Bankruptcy:

Having no more liquid assets, like cash. It's doesn't ahve to be a negative-cash situation.

[Julien Sorel]

42. Which underscores the fallacious reasoning behind the original question.

The assumption was that the other candidates have to match Dean in spending; Iowa demonstrates that's not the case. In fact, Dean has to massively outspend the other candidates just to be competitive. The real question is becoming, "Does Dean have enough money to spend his way to viability?" Of course, once the primaries are over his ability to outspend his opponents ends, but why worry about how he'd do in a general election -- that's defeatism.

[andym]

41. Unlikely

Free media exposure beats a large war chest.
Money is not the be all and end all-- though of course it's helpful.


Example, Steve Forbes in the Republican primaries in 1996 had a large war chest in theory but didn't come close to winning.

[windansea]

43. In a word NO

:loveya:

[Adjoran]

44. Nope.

That's a very risky strategy, and one I doubt he will adopt.

It would entail huge expenditures in the next few contests, which he could do. But that would deplete his own edge in money. If it didn't work, it could boomerang.

A better strategy is to outspend them all, but only proportionately, conserving cash for the later primaries. That way, Dean could concentrate on campaigning full time, while the others will have to continually devote time to fundraising to compete.

[Padraig18]

45. I agree.

And I think he will probably do so. :)

[leyton]

51. What a horrible way to win.

I mean, is that what you're hoping for? I hope not.

I think if he doesn't win New Hampshire or the primaries after that, Dean and his supporters should perhaps accept that he's not going to get the support he needs to win the nomination and thus not the support for the election.

[Polemonium]

53. Worth mentioning, but unlikely

The corporate fat cats, and DLC types are going to put their money somewhere. It is worth mentioning that Dean has the biggest piggy bank and therefore the highest chance of doing battle with *'s war chest. But more importantly, Dean's war chest was filled by ordinary folks like you and me. Limiting the corporate money in the WH = Big change. That much should be clear.

[sangha]

57. There's only one campaign Dean can push into bankruptcy

and after seeing how much money he spent in Iowa, and it's results, I think we found something Dean is good at - Dean is going to "balance" his budget!

[Cuban_Liberal]

59. Theoretically, yes.

He can parcel his cash carefully and force others to spend money which they don't really have.

[Logansquare]

60. It would be a Pyrrhic victory

Unlikely as well--I think the gap in fundraising is going to narrow.

There are a couple of candidates who have raised relatively little and will probably have to drop out because of it, but it won't be Dean alone that forces the issue.

[rbrussell]

63. The Other Candidates (Except Kerry)...

All have to abide by finance limits- so, yes, Dean can.

Of course, spending money doesn't make victory certian.