home

Hillary Raises $10 Mil From 100,000 Donors Since Super Tuesday

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 08:43:00 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Hillary Clinton's campaign tonight announced their fund-raising since Super Tuesday has topped $10 million from more than 100,000 donors.

< The Louisiana Primary Vote | The Jefferson-Jackson Day Speeches: Viriginia >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary Raises $10 Mil From 100,000 Donors Since Super Tuesday | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    It will be a tough month (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by nycvoter on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:00:40 PM EST
    we need to keep raising DONORS, as much as dollars.  We need to ask anyone who shows an interest in Clinton to sign up and give whatever they can even if it's $5.  It will help her continue on and show her support.

    Can anyone tell me why it's a give she will lose Wisconsin and the story with the Tuesday states, shouldn't she have a chance in MD and VA?

    Wisconsin is a wide open primary (none / 0) (#7)
    by RalphB on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:19:05 PM EST
    and there's no reason for voting in the republican side.  Local conservative paper is telling them to vote in the democratic primary and pick their opponent.  That's one reason.

    I haven't looked at MD or VA but I think it's the AA voting percentages and high income voters in northern VA which people assume will go to Obama.


    Parent

    thanks Ralph (none / 0) (#9)
    by nycvoter on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:25:14 PM EST
    no one ever responds to my posts!  So in Wisconsin, if the pundits are right the conservatives should vote for Hillary because they are so afraid of running against a nice guy like Obama?  I thought the AA vote was large in DC wasn't sure the breakdown in MD and VA

    Parent
    No, conservatives should vote for Obama (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by RalphB on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:35:53 PM EST
    so he is the democratic candidate.  Tells you something about what they really want.  :-)

    I don't know the breakdown in VA or MD either but I've read it's large?

    Parent

    See jsonline.com and look for (none / 0) (#13)
    by Cream City on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:44:06 PM EST
    article from front page today, "Advantage for Obama."  Also had the stats in a past thread here on this longtime tactic of the Wisconsin GOP when their race is essentially decided.  They cross over in huge numbers to pick the Dem they think they can beat.  (They do it in state and local primaries, too.)  The paper, a conservative paper, the largest in the state, is telling us -- or telling them, in its usual helpful way -- that they want Obama.

    Parent
    I'm done with moveon.org (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by thereyougo on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 10:49:58 AM EST
    they should have stayed out of this until the nominee was decided. Unwise of them to choose too early,for obvious reasons.

    I don't like how its dividing the democrats.

    Oh wow that is terrific!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (none / 0) (#1)
    by athyrio on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 09:45:45 PM EST
    Obviously people love Hillary!!!!

    Does this count (none / 0) (#8)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:20:55 PM EST
    Does the ten million count her five million dollars? Did five million out of the ten million go to paying her back? How'd she make all that money, anyway?

    Parent
    No and it's none of your business (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by RalphB on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:34:15 PM EST


    Parent
    She and Bill never had much money, (5.00 / 0) (#30)
    by derridog on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 11:51:29 AM EST
    even when Bill was President.  They both wrote books and gave lectures after leaving office.  This was very lucrative.  Beyond that, I don't know but something I read on line said their total net worth is ten million, so in giving five million, that was quite a sacrifice on their part, if that's true.  Ten million for an ex-President, isn't exactly a fortune, either.

    Perhaps someone knows better than I about this.

    Parent

    No, it doesn't include her cash-flow loan and (none / 0) (#14)
    by Cream City on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:47:29 PM EST
    the woman has sold a lot of books, y'know.  She and our former president had to do so to buy their first home of their own, to pay off massive legal fees to fight fraudulent charges, etc.  So they were about the only ones who didn't benefit from the great economy they gave us in the '90s, huh?

    But she is so popular that since then, she made even more than the mortgage with her books, her speaking fees, etc.  She has packed in huge crowds for those in my state several times.  That oughta tell ya something.

    Parent

    I assume you were (none / 0) (#16)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:57:00 PM EST
    also at RedState asking the same question of Romney.

    BTW: The Clintons are worth millions even after paying for the legal fees for their Republican railroading.

    Parent

    [Whisper: check out article (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 02:49:47 AM EST
    by political editor at Huff Post on Bill Clinton's sources of income after his presidency.]

    Parent
    Thank you, Jeralyn. (none / 0) (#3)
    by kangeroo on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:07:43 PM EST
    It's nice to see the good stuff about Hillary (of which there's actually a lot) once in a while.  :)

    100,000 donors (none / 0) (#4)
    by pewterman on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:08:25 PM EST
    I'll bet those 100,000 donors now wish they had held on to their money just a bit longer, at least until after tonight.

    I bet they are glad to help Clinton continue on (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by nycvoter on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:13:54 PM EST
    It's not over until it's over and she's got a long way to go

    Parent
    Nope! (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by oldpro on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:28:22 PM EST
    And I'll be sending her some more.

    Tonight doesn't mean a whole lot...caucus states delegate votes will change as they 'go up the ladder.'  Now that has to play out in 3 more steps...counties, congressional districts and then state conventions where the delegates are mostly allocated by vote of who shows up!  It often changes quite a lot by then.

    What you see as 'wins' and 'numbers' tonight are not anywhere near final.

    Parent

    I'll gladly troll rate myself for this (none / 0) (#6)
    by Ellie on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:17:14 PM EST
    ... but holy m*&$!rf#*%&(n flying crap!!!

    this is a nice article by Bill Press (none / 0) (#11)
    by athyrio on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:34:34 PM EST
    that he wrote over on Huffinton Post

    Is that more than Obama's raised now? (none / 0) (#15)
    by MarkL on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:49:12 PM EST


    Doubt it. (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by oldpro on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:31:04 PM EST
    But it keeps her competetive.

    Hope we don't play 'arms race' with dollars!  That is a loser bigtime.  In fact, last time it ended up with Kerry (after being nearly broke in mid-campaign and having to mortgage his house) having $13M left over...unspent...after...yup...losing.

    That's one time I really DID want my money back.

    Parent

    Me too. Especially after I gave him money (none / 0) (#31)
    by derridog on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 11:54:30 AM EST
    to supposedly challenge the vote if there was funny business in the election and instead he conceded immediately and pocketed the $ for his "next run."

    Parent
    they are both raising record numbers (none / 0) (#18)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:30:20 PM EST
    and that's good for Democrats in November...it means they are invested heavily in winning the White House back from Republicans.

    Parent
    how reliable are the Obama camp's numbers? (none / 0) (#20)
    by thereyougo on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 02:17:04 AM EST
    could they be stretching the numbers a bit?

    Is there a link to verify it? I thought the reports aren't due till the end of the quarter.

    they floated some delegate numbers saying Obama was ahead Super Tuesday and the MSM reported they were behind Hillary.

    I'd Bet Obama Has Raised More (none / 0) (#21)
    by BDB on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 02:41:40 AM EST
    He's been raising money at a remarkable rate and I don't see any reason to think he's stopped.  My guess is that they're waiting to make some sort of announcement when the time is right.

    Parent
    Is it true... (none / 0) (#24)
    by magisterludi on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 06:24:58 AM EST
    BHO charges for every button and bumpersticker his campaign sells and includes those people as "donors" in his media numbers?

    Parent
    The Obscenities of Capitalist 'Democracy' (none / 0) (#23)
    by dutchfox on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 06:21:18 AM EST
    A rather revealing quote by HRC in an NYT article
    "My opponent was able to raise more money, and we intended to be competitive, and we were, and I think the results last night proved the wisdom of my investment."


    Eli Stephens     over at Left I on the News writes:
    And doesn't that tell you an awful lot about capitalist "democracy" - you can only be "competitive" if you have money, and a lot of it.
    ---
    At least one billion dollars are going to be spent on this Presidential election, and probably more. This isn't just a perversion of any concept of "democracy," it's downright obscene. I'm sure I don't need to say this, but do you have any idea what could be accomplished with a billion dollars, in a country with hundreds of thousands of homeless people, millions of people without jobs or health care, and on and on? I'm sure you do.
    Hilly bucks (none / 0) (#25)
    by Afofur on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 08:09:23 AM EST
    How can you trust the source of any of Obama's funds? At least HRC has put her OWN money into her campaign.

    Haha (none / 0) (#26)
    by andrewwm on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 08:39:44 AM EST
    You realize that the Obamas don't have a lot of money to donate to themselves (relatively speaking), mostly because Barack gave up a promising career as an elite lawyer to do community organizing and civil rights law. Michelle has been the breadwinner in their household. Now, they're nowhere near poor, but their net worth is about 60x smaller than the Clintons.

    And a much larger percentage of donations for Obama came from smaller donors - why shouldn't we trust those people?

    Parent

    Ha Ha (none / 0) (#28)
    by IndependantThinker on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 10:34:18 AM EST
    you are being intentionally, factually, inaccurate. Obama only gets 1/3 of his money from small donors. He takes plenty from State Lobbists, partners of federal lobbiests and on and on.

    Parent
    Hillary Raises $10 Mil From 100,000 Donors Since Super Tuesday | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment