Tuesday, April 22, 2008


Taking the commonly bandied about number of $11 million spent in Pennsylvania, with a vote haul (from the NYT) of 1,035,230, Obama spent an average of $10.63 for each vote received.

Taking Hillary's expenditure amount of $3 million, with a vote count of 1,249,936, Hillary spent an average of $2.40 for each vote received.

And, if it's true she only spent $3 million, it looks like she will have recovered most of that cost by tomorrow morning. I wonder how long it is going to take Obama to recoup the $11 million he spent?

We need a president who knows how to make that dollar stretch and uses every penny effectively, not someone who is a wastrel with other people's money.

I approve of frugality.



ghost2 said...

I think that must be money spent on advertising.

Anonymous said...

I just read over on Taylor Marsh's site that the figure she raised tonight is now at $4 million. So it looks like she recouped her Pennsylvania spend and then some.

Xeno said...

Ten dollars per vote is an amazing amount. That makes the fact that Obama couldn't pull out a victory even more amazing. While the Obots are spinning furiously that their guy "closed the gap," the fact of the matter is that a decent candidate would have won with all of his advantages. If he can't pull an "upset" in a primary where he has more money, the party establishment behind him and far better press than his opponent, he doesn't stand a chance in the GE.

When you consider all that Clinton has stacked against her, the fact that she's virtually tied with obama is astounding. If he had to fight as many opponents at the same time as Clinton did, I doubt that he would have done anywhere near as well.

Anonymous said...

Wow. $4 million. That's great. I donated $25 tonight and I hope to donate more after each of the remaining primaries. Obama is so wasteful. I understand that he certainly has the money to waste but under normal circumstances this would be embarassing for any candidate. He did the same thing in all of the other crucial Democratic states that he lost to Clinton. But this time the Obama network at MSNBC can't cover that fact for him. After 6 weeks and $11 million dollars, The Chosen One lost by 10 points. I knew that the MSM wouldn't congratulate Clinton. They've already begun the media spin, trying to blame this loss on Clinton's "negative campaigning". Right. Because Obama spent most of that $11 million on the message of unity and change and not a penny of it on negative attacks and smears. The elitist class of our party lives in a fantasy world. I've spent most of my life going to school and living with people like this and trust me that even the "liberal" ones are totally clueless about what life is like for the majority of Americans struggling to pay for health care and their mortgage. They live in their own idea of how perfect the world would be like if everyone thought the way they did without trying to understand where other people are coming from. That's why Clinton's victory is all the more sweeter for us. She is definitely changing our party for the better and bringing back the working class our party left behind.

gendergappers said...


XP Callahan, in "Radical Politics" suggests a charm offensive by Obamabots posting on pro-Hillary blogs. My take is that they are Trojan horses and should be treated with suspicion. Being nice is reason for caution as they are doubtless out to divide and conquer.

Two doormats should be utilized: One inside a blog stating:
"United we stand" and one outside reading: "Don't tread on me."

The exit polls showed our strength to be more than a third of us will NOT vote for BO if he is unfairly shoved down our throats with FL and MI votes taken from HRC, and continued unfair reporting by media. This drove even MSNBC bonkers last night.

No surprise that HRC won big and that BO apologists in msm are blaming HRC - ho, hum! What else is new.

Davidson said...

She only spent $3M? Wow! That makes her win all the more impressive. I've totally tapped out so I encourage everyone to donate whatever they can! She must win IN and you better believe the media, GOP, and the Obama campaign will pull every stop to stop her.

Donate, everyone! We can do this! If we give her enough money, she will win it for us! She will.

Pat Johnson said...

I woke up this morning to Pat Buchanan and Chris Matthews (gag) actually praising her speech and saying she looked presidential. I had to pinch myself! I think people are taking a closer look at "the One" and having some serious doubts as to whether he can win. The votes and demographics from PA say otherwise. I too donated another $50 to keep this going. She swept my state of MA in the primary and expect the same in Nov.

Hank Gillette said...

Anglachel said:

We need a president who knows how to make that dollar stretch and uses every penny effectively, not someone who is a wastrel with other people's money.

I approve of frugality.

That's pretty funny. You must really approve of poor people then, because they are frugal for the same reason that Hillary has been: they don't have the money.

Hillary started April with her campaign owing $1 million more than cash on hand ($6 million counting her loan to the campaign). If the campaign had had more money, they would have spent it.

Frugality because you are broke is not a virtue.

Betty B. said...

I also intend to keep contributing to Hillary. Obama has a base of over 1 million donors that he can tap. He spent more money in PA than any campaign, ever, and still could not win against Hillary.

Chinaberry Turtle said...

GO HILLARY!!! YEAH BABY!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sending another $100 immediately!!!

Hank - your elitist little jerk got trounced by a lady with only 1/3 the $. Deal w/ it baby!!!!


Chinaberry Turtle said...

They just keep making sure I won't vote for Obama!

This pisses me off so much. How does HuffPo know anything about these two guys? Why are they assumed to be bad men? I know people that look like that; I've got GOOD friends who look JUST LIKE THAT. And they are good, decent men who provide for their families and are valued members of their community.

Thank you, HuffPo, for reminding me why I HATE Obama so much. And yes, this is EXACTLY how NOT to change the world - by deeply insulting those who disagree w/ you about which Democratic candidate is best.

I'd rather cook up some BBQ with those two fellows than hang out for 1 second w/ Obama or any of those HuffPo or San Franciso elitist assholes. And the next time you see any one of us Bubbas in person, I dare you to spew this kind of disrespectful vile to our faces.

This kind of disrespect has consequences. In person, you get your ass kicked. In elections, it makes you lose. HuffPo, you are so stupid it is unbelievable. Do you know nothing about politics? My Obama hate-meter just ticked up two more degrees.

Anonymous said...

hank gillette: What you just said about poor people shows your have the elitist mindset I guess many Obamabots share with their Messiah. I DO approve of poor people and the courage and frugality they have to survive each and every day on minimum wage. So hell yes to frugality. Not all of us have to spend obscene amounts of money to prove that we are just as good if not better than the rich guy.

YAB said...

You made me laugh. Thank you.

Pat Johnson said...

Among the many reasons why I want Hillary to win is that she can then kick sand in the faces of HuffPo, TPM, Daily Kos, the MSM, MoDo, and a host of other chauvinist who have done nothing but show disdain and disrespect toward a female contender. Supporting a petulant brat with a Messiah complex and a very thin resume not even backed up by working experience is somehthing I cannot quite comprehend. This country is in bad shape and will need a someone with the experience she has to turn it around. Him, no so much.

Chinaberry Turtle said...

She's gonna win this thing!!!!!

CMike said...

Chinaberry Turtle,

That picture over at the Huffington Post says it all. I'm not so confident about how this is going to go from here.

Arianna Huffington was a red meat, undocumented immigrant bashing, then Gore bashing, movement conservative up until they threw her and the multi-millions of dollars she received in her divorce settlement out of the Republican Party.

Mr. Huffington had blown a California senate race when it was discovered that he and Arianna preferred undocumented workers look out after their children when they were away. After the election it was revealed that Arianna's husband was a practicing bisexual. What's a rich, recently divorced, connected, moral values Repub to do at that point but leave the GOP and start become a leading voice of the Democratic Party elite.

I may be being unfair here. I've heard Mrs. Huffington explain she left the Republican Party because she slowly came to realize that her good friends like Newt Gingrich were not as committed to helping the poor as she was; something she had not realized during the nineties.

Look, Barack Obama is the perfect corporate media candidate for Corporate America. Those owning the Main Stream Media are hoping they can get him the Democratic nomination and general election losses in '08, '12, and maybe '16. His losses will always be the fault of racists and other ignoramuses but in the out years "this time" it will be different.

And if Sen. Obama ever got elected, Corporate America knows he'd be a lot safer for it than any other viable Democratic alternative like Sen. Edwards or Sen. Clinton.

Becki Jayne said...

Clever. Very clever analysis.

Chinaberry Turtle said...

Anglachel, looks like this thing is gonna go to the convention with some kind of brokered settlement. I would LOVE to hear your political analysis as to what is likely to go down behind closed doors and what the relevant factors will be.

For me, I think the following will be big factors in any brokered decision:

(1) Both Hillary and Obama risk a loss w/o the other on the ticket. Big defections come with either losing and kicked completely off the ticket.

(2) If Hillary is top-of-the-ticket, Obama's heart might say FU to the VP slot. But his head has to say yes. Why? Otherwise, he's looking at hoping Hillary loses and he can run again in 4 years. Problem? That's 4 years of additional record building in the Senate. Obama won't like that. Plus, next presidential run will coincide w/ his Senatorial re-election campaign. That would be damn inconvenient. So, brewing in the VP slot for 8 years might be a much more rational alternative.

(3) If Obama threatens to take his ball and go home rather than take VP slot, Hillary can threaten him w/ a Harold Ford VP slot. That might bring a lot of the Obama defectors back. Even if a Hillary/Ford ticket lost in the GE, that campaign would launch a new young hip black politician onto the national stage: Harold Ford. That's gotta scare Obama, 'cause the next time around, in 4 years, he would no longer be the only viable black candidate. Ford could become the new black candidate w/o all the Obama baggage. Not sure Obama would want to let this happen, so he just might accept the VP slot to keep Ford from climbing up the ladder.

(4) Given the campaign up to now, an Obama/Clinton ticket just wouldn't work. It would look, to everyone, like the incompetent male boss who relies on the unsung know-it-all secretary to get everything done while the boss takes all the credit. Plus, Hillary is too old for this to serve as an 8-year launch pad to the presidency.