The Spoils Go To The Most Prolific Campaign Ever

It has been over a week since Barack Obama was elected President and already there is a mad rush for jobs in the Administration over at change.gov. When you win the Presidency, plenty of positions open up in the new White House for the party faithful to apply to and receive if their credentials stack up against the challenge. However, when you are Barack Obama and have just completed the best campaign for President ever with tons of cash left over, there's cash and prizes for those that worked for the Obama operation.

From The NY Daily News:

Long-suffering political footsoldiers who toiled tirelessly, at least since September, to put Obama in the White House recently learned they will be getting extra paychecks worth a month's salary, the Daily News has learned.

And boy, are they grateful.

"I think it's a very nice gesture for people who slaved away and sacrificed for the past year," said one pleased ex-staffer.

"It was totally unexpected, and you can't believe how helpful this is with the holidays coming," the lower-level worker said. "A lot of people thought they were going to be broke and would have to try to find a job in this rotten economy. It's a huge help."

In addition to the cold cash, staffers also have the option of keeping their campaign-issued computers and BlackBerrys - but must pay income tax on the hardware if they do.

All's fair with income tax, this side is definitely going to start by respecting the rule of law. Seriously though, this is a fantastic thing for Obama to do for his campaign army. It is nothing short of grueling to be a campaign staffer and often do a lot for very little in return (sans the changing our country for the better part). Now this is set of bonuses I can definitely get behind, unlike the schmucks in the financial district who are still looking forward to their obscene benefits next month. Hopefully that'll change once the O man gets to work.

Big Money In The State Senate Races

If you've been following the State Senate races or live in a district with a tight contest, you know that there's been a lot of campaigning going on to determine the control of the divided body. Well in order to operate all of those campaigns requires a lot of money, even in the less expensive upstate media markets. Republicans are determined to hold their last vestige of power and the Democrats feel destined to take it away and make New York a one-party-ruled state. So how much money does that take?

From The NY Times:

Candidates and party committees have spent well over $40 million so far in the Senate contests, according to an analysis of recent filings by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a government watchdog organization. By Election Day, the group estimated, that figure will almost certainly exceed the $43.6 million spent during 2006 and will be far more than the $27 million spent during the 2004 Senate elections, according to the analysis.

With a week to go before Election Day, Republicans had at least $11.7 million on hand, far more than the Democrats’ $5.2 million. Republicans, who have controlled the Senate for roughly four decades, are greatly outspending Democrats. The tally now is 31 Republicans, 29 Democrats and 2 vacancies.

During the last three weeks alone, Republican candidates and committees have spent $7.4 million in races around the state, compared with at least $5 million for Democratic candidates and committees.

The Republicans’ financial advantage is less pronounced than in past years in part because Democrats have been able to raise more money from businesses and special interests, thanks to the narrowness of the Republican majority and to Mr. Paterson’s decision to break with Albany tradition by aggressively helping his fellow Democrats in the Senate.

Control of the Senate is extremely important to both parties. Keeping things the same gives the GOP some relevance in the state's power apparatus and a way to hold onto the status quo of getting next to nothing done on the progressive agenda. If the Democrats take the Senate back, a whole host of reforms promises to make its way from the Legislature to the Governor and then on to the people of New York. Everything from an expansion of renters' rights to legalizing gay marriage is possible. What determines the agenda are those New Yorkers living in key districts across the state that can shake up Albany like it hasn't been in over forty years.

Money, Money, Money, Give Me That Money!

John Mercurio and Nora McAlvanah of Hotline TV take a look at the money race that developed after Super Tuesday's results came in. So far we are up to almost $20 million in contributions for both candidates combined in less than five days. Five days!



Makes you wonder what Huckabee and McCain have pulled in during the same time, eh?

The Five Million Dollar Mistake

The big news on Super Wednesday is that Hillary (and/or/but not Bill, their assets are combined right?) loaned her campaign $5,000,000 cash late last month. She took in an impressive $13.5 million in January but it is nowhere near what Obama raised, averaging better than a million a day. Now that she's won a few big states yesterday the spigots are opening up for her again, but will it be enough to compete....and what does this news say about her campaign?

From TPM:

This morning, Mark Halperin floated an intriguing question: Are the Clintons financing Hillary's campaign with their own money?

Now the Clinton campaign has finally answered: Yes, they are. Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson sends over the following:

Late last month Senator Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million.The loan illustrates Sen. Clinton’s commitment to this effort and to ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win across this nation. We have had one of our best fundraising efforts ever on the web today and our Super Tuesday victories will only help in bringing more support for her candidacy.

The revelation suggests another emerging dynamic in the race: Now that the campaigns are committed to grinding it out for weeks and weeks, perhaps all the way until the convention. The Hillary camp faces the prospect of being dramatically outspent by the Obama campaign, which has enjoyed huge fundraising success.

It sounds Romney-esque to me that she needs to float a huge sum of cash like this, though she is nothing like Romney in that she is a competitive candidate. Nevertheless, I thought that Democrats should be looking for a people-powered candidate instead of one that needs to (partly) finance their campaign.

Clinton Campaign Has Money Woes?

It is almost hard to imagine, but Hillary is pushing her supporters to donate even more money to her campaign. After raising more than $100 million dollars, she has a "paltry" $15-25 million remaining, seemingly blowing it all in Iowa. Of course, she isn't the first candidate to do this in the Hawkeye state and probably will not be the last. And like those other candidates (e.g. Dean) who also happened to lose in Iowa, the lack of momentum hurts even more when you consider that upcoming primary states that have big media markets are going to cost major bucks to run advertising. Basically, it isn't looking good for Mrs. Clinton.

From Time:

With momentum against her and a battle plan that appears to be staking everything on the big and expensive states like New York and California that hold their primaries on February 5, Clinton's campaign is putting new pressure on its fundraisers to come up with the cash she will need to carry her through. "Clearly, by every measure, I hear they are in a real financial crunch," says one prominent fundraiser. "Here's the dilemma: You have a situation where there clearly is a full court press to raise more money, but considering the state of decline of the campaign, there's a real question of whether people are going to want to give. It's more than just raising money; you've got to give people a sense of potential."[...]

Clinton fundraisers say there is also a new emphasis in the appeals they are getting from the campaign. Where they previously focused on bringing in $4,600 donations — pressing donors to "max out" by giving the legal limit of $2,300 for the primary election and $2,300 for the general — they are now being asked to drum up $2,300 contributions. "They started out running a general election campaign," says one. "Now there's a real fixation on the primary." The day after the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, the campaign staged a "callathon" to encourage smaller contributions.

Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson notes that fundraising has always been a high priority for her operation, which he says continues on sound financial footing. "We have considerable resources," he says, adding that the campaign is flush enough to be buying large amounts of air time for television ads in New Hampshire, as well as in South Carolina and Nevada, where the next two contests will be held.

Now I understand the need to keep the war chest flush with cash, but why cut holes in the bottom of it when it isn't necessary? South Carolina is all but a foregone conclusion and although she does have a shot in Nevada, why waste that money on all that airtime. Lavish spending on commericials may work for campaigns that are flying high and mighty, but this is a time for her to buckle down and concentrate on winning some primaries. Let go of the "inevitability" persona Hillary.

Watch Out Hillary, Here Comes Obama

One of Hillary's biggest strengths going into this race was her ability to raise major amounts of cash. With the 1st quarter numbers in, she didn't disappoint. Raising $25 million dollars is not small change. However, Obama released his numbers today and startling to some, matched that amount. Thats not all, while Hillary raised that money from 50,000 donors, Obama doubled that number.

One hundred thousand individual donors proves he has widespread appeal while Hillary's numbers show that the big-time Democrats largely have her back. The problem for Hillary is that she just doesn't appeal to the masses. Especially so in the Democratic activist sphere, which is the one that counts here.

More from The Huffington Post:

The campaign reported that the figure included at least $23.5 million that he can spend on the highly competitive primary race. The Clinton campaign has yet to disclose how much they can use for the primary verses money that is designated for the general election.

While Clinton has honed a vast national fundraising network through two Senate campaigns and her husband's eight years as president, Obama launched his bid for the White House with a relatively small donor base concentrated largely in Illinois, his home state. But his early opposition to the Iraq war and voter excitement over his quest to be the first black president quickly fueled a powerful fundraising machine.

Since he formally declared his presidential campaign in February, Obama has been traveling the country with a focus on urban areas where he could build his momentum and bring in new donors. He attracted big-money Hollywood and Wall St. executives along with families who came out to his stops in places like Oklahoma that sometimes are neglected by other candidates.

Obamamania continues to surge while Hillary is relying on a network that has been in place for years. Yet, even her donors are wary. While Obama proudly reported that most of his contributions are for the primary, Hillary is obviously embarrassed by the primary cash she has raised. If she wasn't, it would have been released.

Meanwhile, Edwards raised a slightly smaller number, around $14 million. Although the amount is nearly 40 percent below his two main rivals, don't be surprised if he has a surge of his own. Time will only tell if Obama can transform his rockstar into a long-term success. With today's media constantly looking for ratings over substance, you never know what they'll throw at Obama or any of the candidates tomorrow, next week or in the coming months leading up to the primary.