Bottom-Up strategy is a winner! Appreciate the words, Cyrena

Cyrena:

Are you deliberately obtuse?  Of COURSE I rounded off the numbers.  Some were rounded down ($5.2 million became $5 million) and some were rounded up ($5.8 million became $6 mllion).  So what?

The point is that Obama has taken as much “special interest” money as Hillary, and that special interest money represents a FAR greater percentage of their overall total intake than lobby or PAC money, which you and others have harped on.

And I continue to bring this up because Obama rails against “special interests” more than any other candidate.  So it is VERY relevant to the discussion.

Peace.

Well Maani,

You’ve posted these ‘figures’ about 287.3 times, and I’m clearly not sure what your aim is, but I think you’re spinning your wheels.

In reality, these ‘statistics’ come across as bogus to anybody that actually deals with statistical research anyway. Nice round numbers across all the columns, with the one small salute to the .5 in the Health Industries category. No breakdown at all, for any of the entities that these categories allegedly represent.

Move on Maani. You’ve beat this pony to death, and never even got any mileage out of it.

Cyrena:

We may be ONE “special interest” (and of course the most important one), but we are not the only one. In addition to taking more money from the energy industry (~$5 million) than any other candidate (in either party), here is a short list of how much Obama has taken from other “special interests” (and, yes, Hillary has taken just as much, though in diffeent amounts from the various interests):

Legal/Law Firms: $11 million
Securities/Investments: $6 million
Education: $4 million
Real Estate: $3 million
Business/Finance: $5 million
Health Industries: $2.5 million

It is instructive to note that, while he harps on “lobby” and “PAC” money, the above special interests represent a FAR greater amount.  For example, Obama took in ~$150 million total.  Of that, he took no lobby money and about $4,000 in PAC money.  A truly negligible percent of $150 million.  However, just the numbers above (which do not include other special interests, such as telecomm, etc.) represent ~$36 million - a MAJOR percentage of the total $150 million.  [N.B.  Hillary’s numbers are similar; though she took in ~$800,000 in lobby money and $40,000 in PAC money, these, again, are negligible vis-a-vis $150 million.]

So anyone who thinks that Obama raised ~150 million from $10, $25 and $100 contributions ha got to stop smoking crack and get back to the real world.

Peace.

I dunno Aegrus…

You know, I’m generally a real ‘play by the rules’ type lady. But, the GOP has absolutely NO recognition of ‘principles, integrity,character, or any thing even close). Money is the ONLY thing they are about, and they’ve been stealing our blood and treasure, for far too long now.

LOOPHOLES? I say let Obama collect all the money he wants...FROM US. It’s never ‘play by the rules’ with the GOP, until their losing.

Same with George. That’s what he did all though Yale, instead of the standard thing. He played the “World Domination” board game. (not unlike Monopoly) and he’d harass his colleagues, (when they were trying to study) and always insist on either extending the game (past the original rules) or otherwise changing them, if he was losing.

So, Obama has managed to collect the bulk of his money so far, (contrary to the lies of certain posters here) through basically nickle and dime type donations, from a huge majority of the people. And, because this thing started SOOOO early, (is it over yet?) he’s had a long time.

The average supporter, even those at the bottom of the chain, manage to work in anywhere between $15.00 and $35.00 a month. Now of course the baskets may be coming up a tad bit short at Sunday services, but poor folk know how to stretch the ever shrinking dollar. We’re used to it.

So, that has turned out well for Barack, far better than I ever expected. The larger contributions from celebrities and other rich folks certainly helps as well.

But at the end of the day, he’s done well by small contributions from far larger numbers of people. I’d also say that he hasn’t needed to spend his campaign funds in the standard way. Most of political candidates pay their campaign workers, and pay their expenses, and they travel at a relatively top dollar. (by air, and they stay in hotels, and they have to eat).

I learned from personal experience that Obama’s campaign is MOSTLY accomplished via volunteers. If they can’t travel, they work the phones and the Internet. If they do travel, they team up ‘car pools’. Housing is provided in by other volunteers who have space in whatever the cities are.

It has been, in a few short words, an AMAZING organized effort. Reminds me of the 60’s, when folks would board a bus, or do whatever it took. And, $5.00 here, or $20.00 there, IF IS IS SUSTAINED...makes all the difference in the world. I’m not kidding, these folks MAKE IT WORK!!

So, that’s why he’s been able to use his money on the stuff that can’t be ‘volunteered’. Like TV air time or whatever.

So, much of his campaign has been organized by volunteers, and it’s been doable because of organization, and a ‘spreading of the load’. People do what they can, and it works because the load is balanced. There are also far more ‘jobless’ people now, so it’s not like they don’t have time. Donate a week, or donate a weekend, or donate a few days in-between. Got kids? Stay home with ‘em and work the phones.

And, I’d say that’s ‘principled’ enough for me. The naysayers call them a cooning cult, or worse. But guess what? That’s what works! It gives people a sense of having a part in their own destiny and survival.

So, if he decides this is better than ‘public financing’ I say the hell with McCain. He can have Obama’s share of that as well. How much is $3.00 on a tax return anyway, when folks don’t even have enough income to file one?

It’s DEFINITELY not enough to run a successful campaign in this day and time.

Besides, the GOP and the neoconners have been using our money to enrich themselves for decades. Time for us to use our resources to enrich ourselves.

They only care about a ‘level playing field’ when it is no longer tilted in their favor. 

The ‘haves’ have had it all, until one day they looked up, and their ‘own’ had taken their stuff TOO! Whoops!They never saw it coming.

Now it’s time for the ‘have nots’ to pool our resources.

Maani,

If ‘special interest’ money is me and the folks in the ‘hood, (which is where it’s coming from) then he can take as much of it as we are able to contribute, since WE ARE the SPECIAL INTEREST!!

Oh yeah. I don’t have a problem with that at all.

We want our country and our government back. This just shows how we can ‘pool our resources’.

It’s an Indian Thing.

Now, go eat your principles. There should be a whole bucket of ‘em in your trough.

thetimes:

“To say that Senator Obama should voluntarily limit the amount of private contributions to his campaign because he initially agreed to that years ago is foolish...”

It was not “years ago”; it was last year.  And he made a pledge both verbally and in writing to do so.

“Obama would be a fool to agree to public financing considering the depth and breadth of his public support...Things change and he is probably sincerely surprised at the amount of public financial support that he continues to receive.”

That is not an adequate reason for going back on a pledge.

“But changing your position as a situation changes is not like betraying your principles while you try and woo a few voters.”

That is EXACTLY what it is like.  He IS betraying his principles, one of the most claimed of which is his wanting to keep “special interest” money out of elections.  Yet now that he sees how much of that money he can (and has) raked in, he is taking the politically expedient path rather then the principled one.

This article might interest you and open your eyes a bit more:

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16601

Peace.

All Barack wants is a discussion to have a clear-cut principal campaign. He wants public financing, but I’m sure some loopholes have been brought to his attention. He’s just ensuring the right thing happens, and both candidates get equal treatment.

“The unprecedented sum is sure to make it that much harder for Mr. Obama to agree to accept public financing for the general election and abide by the spending limits that come with it, something he indicated last year he would do if the Republican nominee also signed up for the campaign finance program. Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, has recently hammered Mr. Obama for wavering on the issue.”

As well he should.  Obama both stated - saying “Yes,” not “maybe” or “only if” - that he would abide by public financing, and filled out and signed a pledge to do so.  He is now waffling over what he “said” and what he “meant.” This is typical political expediency.

What happened to his promise not to engage in “politics as usual?” His attempt to weasel out of his pledge - by adding so many restrictions that it makes public financing no longer viable - is without question “politics as usual.”

Peace.