Obama raises $52 Million in June

[july425 2]

WASHINGTON (AP) Democrat Barack Obama raised $52 million last month for his presidential campaign, more than twice as much as Republican rival John McCain in a significant boost to his financial cache for the fall contest.

The Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee ended June with a combined total of $92.3 million in the bank. The figure represents a notable fundraising jump, especially for the DNC.

Obama reported $72 million cash on hand and the DNC $20.3 million. But the Democrats still lag Republican John McCain's presidential campaign and the Republican Party.

Last week, McCain reported raising more than $22 million in June, which was his best month of the year. Together, the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee began July with about $95 million in the bank.

The reason for the discrepancy greater fundraising by Obama and the DNC but less money in the bank than McCain and the GOP is because until now the DNC had spent much of its money, leaving little cash on hand.

The $52 million is Obama's second-best fundraising month of the year he raised $55 million in February. Of his June total, about $50 million was money that can be spent in the remaining summer primary season and about $2 million can only be spent in the fall.

That means Obama has been able to continue to tap new donors and donors who have yet to contribute the $2,300 maximum to the primary portion of his campaign. Altogether, Obama has raised nearly $340 million during his presidential run, $12 million of which is for the general election.

Unlike McCain, Obama has chosen to bypass the presidential public financing system for the fall campaign, which would have provided him with $84 million but would have prevented him from raising private money. McCain has agreed to accept the public money, which puts a greater emphasis on party fundraising.

Obama can roll over unused primary election money into the fall general election contest. By being able to continue to raise primary election dollars, Obama now has a vast network of donors that he can still tap for the general election. Donors are allowed to give up to $2,300 for a primary election and another $2,300 for the general.

The DNC said it raised $22.4 million in June, a dramatic increase from the $4.7 million it raised in May. The spike in fundraising came after Obama and the DNC formed a joint fundraising effort. Donors can give a maximum contribution to the party of $28,500.

The DNC still fell short of its Republican counterpart, which raised $26 million in June.

With the substantial help of their respective parties, each campaign is looking to raise more than $400 million during the five months preceding the November election.

McCain, aided by a large cash on hand surplus at the RNC, is off to a head start and has been outspending Obama in advertising. McCain has concentrated his advertising in about 11 battleground states. Obama has been spending less but has broadened the field to about 18 states.

In a letter to supporters, Obama's campaign manager says the impressive thing is how it was done. The average donation to Obama's campaign in June was $68 from hundreds of thousands of supporters.  http://arkansasmatters.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=85381

[pencilpusher. just because 3,464]

I will NEVER...EVER give money to any politician. I can't understand in this day and age why money is important to get you elected. Free media is all over the place and people in the remote parts of the world know your name.

If people are giving money to any politician that they could use in their gas tank or food pantry..they need not ever complain about gas prices or barely scraping by. Ever.

[jidady 11,055]

That was really generous of Steve and Snake.

[octoslash 18,426]

Unlike McCain, Obama has chosen to bypass the presidential public financing system for the fall campaign, which would have provided him with $84 million but would have prevented him from raising private money.

 

Obama had promised not to bypass the public system a few months back; he and McCain had an agreement.  Of course, typical politician that he is. Obama sees that he can get so much more cash from his disciplies, and he just couldn't stop himself from reconsidering his position. 

LOL

[silentbob1272 6,050]

A fool and his money are soon parted

Thomas Tusser

[capologist 13,665]

The total amount of both candidates is nuts. Does it really take that much to say, "Elect me?"

Wouldn't it be better to give charitable health care or perhaps help pay a bunch of those fallen on hard times bills with all that money instead of trumping it all out on overplayed commercials, etc?

They should set up a series of public debates and that's it for campaigning then all this money could do something worthwhile like set up an Obama fund, McCain fund, and a Barr fund. Let the candidates decide what charitable events their funds go to and that would further let America know about their candidate in addtion to the debates...

[saint vitus 0]

Wow, someone wants Obama to be the president really badly.

[XLDenaliReturns 0]

capologist (7/17/2008)

---

The total amount of both candidates is nuts. Does it really take that much to say, "Elect me?"

Wouldn't it be better to give charitable health care or perhaps help pay a bunch of those fallen on hard times bills with all that money instead of trumping it all out on overplayed commercials, etc?

They should set up a series of public debates and that's it for campaigning then all this money could do something worthwhile like set up an Obama fund, McCain fund, and a Barr fund. Let the candidates decide what charitable events their funds go to and that would further let America know about their candidate in addtion to the debates...

i hear ya. it kind of makes you wonder when people spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a job that pays like $300K for a max of 8 years. and i think your idea about paying medical bills or helping people out would be a much more convincing campaigning mechanism than buying airtime and spewing out vague rhetoric. it could also easily be illegal or construed as "buying votes", i guess.

disagree about having only debates and no campaigning at all. IMO that would only serve to maintain the 2-party status quo.

[capologist 13,665]

XLDenaliReturns (7/17/2008)

i hear ya. it kind of makes you wonder when people spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a job that pays like $300K for a max of 8 years. and i think your idea about paying medical bills or helping people out would be a much more convincing campaigning mechanism than buying airtime and spewing out vague rhetoric. it could also easily be illegal or construed as "buying votes", i guess.

disagree about having only debates and no campaigning at all. IMO that would only serve to maintain the 2-party status quo.

Why would it only maintain the 2-party status quo? Any candidate can participate and then it becomes a matter of where people stand on the issues instead of who's marketing machine works best...

[XLDenaliReturns 0]

capologist (7/17/2008)

---

XLDenaliReturns (7/17/2008)

i hear ya. it kind of makes you wonder when people spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a job that pays like $300K for a max of 8 years. and i think your idea about paying medical bills or helping people out would be a much more convincing campaigning mechanism than buying airtime and spewing out vague rhetoric. it could also easily be illegal or construed as "buying votes", i guess.

disagree about having only debates and no campaigning at all. IMO that would only serve to maintain the 2-party status quo.

Why would it only maintain the 2-party status quo? Any candidate can participate and then it becomes a matter of where people stand on the issues instead of who's marketing machine works best...

maybe if it were formatted completely different from modern debates, with every candidate being given equal time to all answer the same questions.

every political debate i've ever seen is 90+% questions for D's and R's (and only the massively rich and well-known ones at that), and a couple quick questions, usually slanted, for any other party or independent.

[capologist 13,665]

XLDenaliReturns (7/17/2008)

maybe if it were formatted completely different from modern debates, with every candidate being given equal time to all answer the same questions.

every political debate i've ever seen is 90+% questions for D's and R's (and only the massively rich and well-known ones at that), and a couple quick questions, usually slanted,for any other party or independent.

Oh yeah, no doubt on that one. Straight up neutral questions, equal time for all candidates. I think if that were done then that would solve most problems...

[Wild Bill 271]

What a waste of money on both sides.  They should donate it all to the homeless.  That's what a "real man" would do!  Shameless!!

[VincentVanBro 55]

capologist (7/17/2008)

---

The total amount of both candidates is nuts. Does it really take that much to say, "Elect me?"

Wouldn't it be better to give charitable health care or perhaps help pay a bunch of those fallen on hard times bills with all that money instead of trumping it all out on overplayed commercials, etc?

They should set up a series of public debates and that's it for campaigning then all this money could do something worthwhile like set up an Obama fund, McCain fund, and a Barr fund. Let the candidates decide what charitable events their funds go to and that would further let America know about their candidate in addtion to the debates...

In theory that would work, but the way politics has been working lately any serious candidate needs a big budget so that they can stop smear campaigns.

For example, its just pretty much common sense that Obamas campaign needs a sizable war chest to combat the next muslim/terrorist/radical christian/communist smear campaign that will inevidably happen as we get closer to november.