Superdelegates -- who's selling and who's buying?

[theHandpuppet]

And guess who's buying?

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=336

Seeking Superdelegates

As the Democratic Party's superdelegates decide whether to support Clinton or Obama, will they take into account the $900,000 they've received from the candidates?

February 14, 2008 | (Story updates and chart available here).
(Figures in this story have been adjusted to reflect Sen. Ted Kennedy's contributions from the two candidates, which were overlooked in the original posting. Changes are in bold.) At this summer's Democratic National Convention, nearly 800 members of Congress, state governors and Democratic Party leaders could be the tiebreakers in the intense contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. If neither candidate can earn the support of at least 2,025 delegates in the primary voting process, the decision of who will represent the Democrats in November's presidential election will fall not to the will of the people but to these "superdelegates"—the candidates' friends, colleagues and even financial beneficiaries. Both contenders will be calling in favors.

And while it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials who are superdelegates have received at least $904,200 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama, who narrowly leads in the count of pledged, "non-super" delegates, has doled out more than $698,200 to superdelegates from his political action committee, Hope Fund, or campaign committee since 2005. Of the 82 elected officials who had announced as of Feb. 12 that their superdelegate votes would go to the Illinois senator, 35, or 43 percent of this group, have received campaign contributions from him in the 2006 or 2008 election cycles, totaling $232,200. In addition, Obama has been endorsed by 52 superdelegates who haven't held elected office recently and, therefore, didn't receive campaign contributions from him.

Clinton does not appear to have been as openhanded. Her PAC, HILLPAC, and campaign committee appear to have distributed $205,500 to superdelegates. Only 12 percent of her elected superdelegates, or 13 of 109 who have said they will back her, have received campaign contributions, totaling about $95,000 since 2005. An additional 128 unelected superdelegates support Clinton, according to a blog tracking superdelegates and their endorsements, 2008 Democratic Convention Watch.... MORE

[zabet]

1. Whoa!

He out spent her 2:1
campaigning, out spent
her in delegate donations.
He cannot even buy the
nomination and stop it
from going to convention.

:rofl:

[skipos]

2. Lol! Remember when Penn and Hillary said this would be over on Feb 5?

How did that turnout? Looks like "ready from day one" Hillary wasn't so ready.
:rofl:

[zabet]

3. Buying super-delegates.

How does that fit into
being a different type of
politician. It doesn't.
Another case of Obamapocrisy.
Just proves money can damn
near buy you anything, except
a nomination.

:P

[yourguide]

11. No, he did NOT outspend her 2:1

From the inception of both campaigns until the end of January, fund raising totals were:

$139 million HRC (including 5 million dollar loan)
$138 million Obama

Just because the obama campaign has managed their money better, dont push the meme that he outspent her. He out campaigned her for certain but she had the money advantage until February rolled around.

[Exilednight]

14. If you add in Hillary's debt, she has actually spent more than Obama. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

4. Leave it a Hillary Supporter to post this as though a "Gotcha"

that any other discernable adult interested in politics and mentally aware would understand.

Successful and popular politicians raise money and give it to other politicians who happen not to be as fortunate in order to reach, maintain and increase the congressional majority in order for the party to get done what it wants to do.

Just as Rep. Foster, who replaced Rep. Hastert in what, until now was very Republican county; a win achieved not only via his association with Obama, and grassroots organization, this feat could not have been accomplished with another important factor; money.

That's what these donations are all about, and I believe that you will find a Donation to Hillary's campaign in New York from Obama within the numbers that are cited; $3,500 I do believe.

As you might remember, money, at this time, is part of the political process, and he who raises the most money has a better chance of winning elections, and a better chance as helping those who need to win as well.

That is why Hillary at the top of the ticket is not as attractive as Barack Obama....because all in the Democratic party are aware that Money does have something to do with winning elections. period.

[theHandpuppet]

6. And leave it to you...

... to turn an unvarnished presentation of FACTS into a personal attack upon the messenger.

The article stands AS IS.

[Bluerthanblue]

12. no- the article DOESN'T stand as is- you neglected to read the update-

Clinton's leadership political action committee, HILLPAC, which was formed during the 2002 election cycle, in addition to her Senate campaign committee, gave politicians now serving as superdelegates about $617,500 in the 2002 and 2004 election cycles, bringing her total since 2001 to at least $853,600. This includes a $10,000 contribution to Obama's Senate committee in 2004; his PAC, Hope Fund, made a $4,200 contribution to her Senate re-election in 2006.

Obama's Senate committee gave $18,000 to candidates who are now superdelegates during the 2004 cycle, which would bring his total to $729,000 if contributions prior to 2005 were included.

Hillary purchased the most delegates here- or attempted to- if campaign donations equate to a buying a vote-

Facts are facts.


peace~

[theHandpuppet]

13. Please read post #9

If you need further clarification as to the topic of this thread.

Thanks!

[Bluerthanblue]

15. the fact is, she did outspend Obama- buying superdelegates isn't

something I'm very pleased about, but the the statement made on the page you linked to is mis-leading.

peace~

[Johnny__Motown]

5. His lead in pledged delegates is insurmountable.. not narrow,,,, also

Raising money is essential to the political process as it now exists.


Obama's ability to raise huge amounts of money is a good thing.


His donating to other Dems to help them win re-election is a good thing


Hillary has also given money to SD, just not as much because she can't afford it.



Hillary has already lost, deal with it.

[theHandpuppet]

7. Jeezil, some of y'all can be very funny at times.

I wonder what the reactions here would have been had I posted the article substituting the name "Clinton" for "Obama".

Hmmm.... let me guess.... :think:

[fujiyama]

8. Hillary had a warchest in '06

and blew a huge chunk of it on an election she was going to win anyways rather than distributing that money to race that needed the money.

What Obama is doing is great. He's raising money and distributing that to win seats ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, rather than just dismissing states out of hand. No, we might not carry some other very red states in the general election this cycle, but we do need to get Dems elected from those places. Hillary has obviously never understood the 50 state strategy.

[theHandpuppet]

10. I suggest you do a little more reading

On how the monies from Mr. Obama's PAC were distributed.

The candidate of change, eh?

[theHandpuppet]

9. More Afternoon Reading...

http://politicalamnesia.blogspot.com/2008/02/obamas-hope-fund-piggy-bank-for.html

Obama's HOPE FUND, Piggy Bank for SuperDelegates?

Senator Barack Obama has said on numerous occasions that he doesn't take money from PAC's or Special Interest Groups. That is a bold statement considering the Chairman of the Nuclear Industry's Lobby John Rowe is one of Barack's largest supporters and who also is the Chairman of Exelon. Never mind all that- let's look at Senator Obama's Political Action Committee, uh, I mean HOPE Fund. During the 2006 election cycle HOPE Fund contributed over $337,000.00 to candidates or members of the House of Representatives running for re-election. HOPE Fund also contributed over $238,000.00 to Senate candidates or members who were running for re-election. So far during the 2008 campaign cycle, HOPE Fund has contributed a whopping $299,000.00 to candidates or sitting members of Congress. Compare those numbers to Senator Clinton's. During those same cycles HILL PAC contributed less than $110,000.00 to members or candidates running for House seats. And less than less than $180,000.00 to members or candidates for the US Senate. HILL PAC has not contributed to any members or candidates in the 2008 cycle, so far.

We all know money grants access, whether it comes from lobbyist, individuals, or the evil "special interests." The big question here is, will Senator Obama's HOPE Fund investments pay off in Super-delegates?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/26/clinton_critiques_obama_pac.html

Clinton Critiques Obama PAC
Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign today accused rival Sen. Barack Obama of campaigning in a manner that "appears to be inconsistent with the prevailing election laws," a statement released in response to this morning's report in The Washington Post that described how Obama's senate leadership PAC doled money out to politicians in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

In January, Obama announced that he would stop raising money for the leadership committee, called Hopefund. But in recent months, Obama has handed out more than $180,000 from the PAC to local Democratic groups and candidates in the key early-voting states, campaign reports show. Some of the recipients of Hopefund's largesse were state and local politicians who have recently endorsed Obama's presidential bid. The fund also spent more than $440,000 on other expenses, including contributions to Democratic candidates in states that do not have early presidential contests.

The Clinton campaign put out this statement earlier today: "It is our understanding that a candidate's campaign is barred from using the candidate's leadership PAC to benefit his or her campaign which is why we shut down HillPAC when Senator Clinton announced her run for the White House. On the campaign trail, Senator Obama is outspoken about his desire to reform the campaign finance system so it was surprising to learn that he has been using his PAC in a manner that appears to be inconsistent with the prevailing election laws."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2007/11/oops-1.html
TOP OF THE TICKET
POLITICS, COAST TO COAST, WITH THE L.A. TIMES

Turns out, some Obama PAC money came from PACs

Before he ostentatiously stopped taking money from political action committees to run for president, Sen. Barack Obama quietly took money from political action committees.

As a presidential candidate, Obama claims to be an outsider eager to shake up the Washington establishment by refusing to accept donations from political action committees and Washington lobbyists. This year, they're the bad guys.

But this wasn’t always the case.

Back in 2005 and 2006, Obama raised $123,283 from other political action committees and put them into a political action committee of his own. He called it Hopefund....

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama's_contributions_to_campaign_endorsers

Barack Obama's contributions to campaign endorsers
This article is part of the
SourceWatch and Congresspedia coverage
of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and
the 2008 presidential election

Barack Obama "has been the most aggressive of presidential candidates in using his leadership PAC—money used for national party-building, including helping other members of Congress, or local candidates in the home state—to help the campaigns of state and local candidates and not coincidentally, the funds spent that way have gone to Democrats in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire<1> and South Carolina. More than one-third of his leadership PAC money is being used this way," Alex Knott reported November 16, 2007.

"Some of the recipients of Hopefund's largess are state and local politicians who have recently endorsed Obama's presidential bid," Solomon reported.<7> "Obama's PAC reported giving a $1,000 contribution, for instance, to New Hampshire state Sen. Jacalyn Cilley on July 25,<8><9> six days before she announced she was endorsing Obama for president.

"Likewise, state Rep. J. Todd Rutherford, a lawmaker from South Carolina, received a $1,000 contribution from Obama's PAC on Sept. 24, a few months after he endorsed Obama," Solomon wrote.

"The bulk of donations from Obama's PAC to state and local candidates this year went to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. In addition, there were more than $60,000 in donations to national candidates in those same states,<9> including $9,000<10><11> for Rep. Paul W. Hodes, the first member of Congress from New Hampshire to endorse Obama earlier this year....