Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:52 PM
Original message |
I highly doubt she's out of money. |
|
Yeah, yeah, her staff's going without pay, loaning herself money, etc., etc. Frankly, I don't think I buy it. She's too smart; too savvy; too intelligent to not have forseen the possibility of this race going beyond Super Tuesday. I think she's positioning herself.
She's trying to make herself look like an underdog. She's trying to inspire her support base to donate. She's trying to minimize the upcoming primaries; she'll be able to say, "Well, yeah, he outspent me" when she loses, and spin her following wins as "comebacks."
But I severely doubt she's out of money. She's too canny for that.
|
MH1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:52 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I agree with your assessment. |
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:53 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I've considered that possibility |
|
We'll see when they are forced to report their fundraising/spending.
|
maddiejoan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:53 PM
Response to Original message |
|
you're gonna blow our secret ;)
|
Colobo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:53 PM
Response to Original message |
4. It's all part of a strategy to get more donors. |
Joe the Revelator
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:54 PM
Response to Original message |
5. She has to report on the 20th |
|
If she's lying, it'll come out before too long.
|
grantcart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:54 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I don't know it completely disrupted any positive spin on |
|
the ST big state victories, and is a horrendous amount of bad publicity. Besides I don't think that she would lie about writing the check. That is eventually going to be disclosed
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
12. Oh, I don't doubt she wrote the check. But this isn't exactly "bad publicity." Sure, it hurts her |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-06-08 10:57 PM by Occam Bandage
short-term, but she's going to lose the next few primaries anyway. By the time she releases figures, she'll be able to spin it as a groundswell of support leading to a comeback. The Clintons love the "comeback" story; they pushed it even in MA, where she was never once shown trailing in a poll.
|
grantcart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
24. well she's going to get clobbered in the weekend caucuses |
|
(which she skipped over in her press conference this morning) and then lose some primaries. Thats a lot of bad news to absorb. Also the payment of the salaries will be in their published expense report so that part has to be true to.
|
Flabbergasted
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
25. If you're right, she has made an miscalculation. This will not blunt Obama's |
|
momentum but it will damage here base of support.
|
Flabbergasted
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
18. That's my thoughts. The inevitable candidate running out of money while |
|
the underdog swims in it doesn't seem like the best publicity stunt.
|
Singular73
(999 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:55 PM
Response to Original message |
|
She has to disclose how much money she has.
If it states she had 20 mill when she loaned herself 5, your secret little strategy will implode.
She needs money. Her rich corporate sponsors have maxed out their contributions.
Simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
13. rich corporate sponsors have maxed out? - at $2300 each?? LOL |
Singular73
(999 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
31. Yes. That's the limit. |
bridgit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:55 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Out of money? I doubt it. I do wish I had 5mil & likely change++ in my checking account though... |
Yupster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
and since when have the Clintons had millions to throw around.
He always talked about how he made $ 30 k and they had no money. Looks like they cashed in pretty quickly.
Book revenue I guess.
|
AX10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:56 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Can you Obamites get your stories correct. |
|
First she is out of money and her campaign in done for and now she has a ton of cash on hand. Which one is it?
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
17. The suggestible ones are cheering, claiming she's out of cash. I think they're being played. |
AtomicKitten
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:56 PM
Response to Original message |
City Lights
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:56 PM
Response to Original message |
11. I don't buy it either. |
|
It's just part of her strategy.
|
chascarrillo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Clinton is positively brilliant, no doubt... but she engineered running out of funds to pay staff, hid a loan to her campaign, and wants to rely on a patently ridiculous "underdog" meme?
Occam's razor, Occam Bandage. Occam's fucking razor!
:)
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
20. Hey, Occam's Bandage would be the antidote to Occam's Razor, wouldn't it? |
DJ13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |
15. I dont believe ANY candidate would claim to be low on cash just to become the underdog |
|
History is rife with viable candidates that ran out of money and lost momentum as a result.
Theres no benefit to admitting they dont have money, as saying that discourages the large donors she most needs.
|
truebrit71
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |
16. She loaned her own campaign 5 mill...she's in DEEP shit... |
mrreowwr_kittty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:58 PM
Response to Original message |
19. I am so heartily sick of the "underdog" routine |
|
She's a household name for fuck's sake! She should be getting 70% of the vote in every state.
Her campaign sucks.
|
marlakay
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 10:59 PM
Response to Original message |
21. What it tells me is she is not good at budgeting |
|
a few months ago she had more money than Obama. His campaign seems to be doing good with their money. I have a feeling he is getting more "free" volunteers. And look at much mark penn gets, thats crazy, and he's so not worth it.
he reminds me of karl rove. just for hiring him alone we should not vote for her.
|
mrreowwr_kittty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
Clinton's campaign is very top-heavy. I'll bet the lion's share of her money is going to high-priced consultants.
|
Sir Jeffrey
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
35. Karl Rove wins elections, Mark Penn does not. nt |
VolcanoJen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:00 PM
Response to Original message |
22. If that were the case... |
|
... wouldn't she come out looking like a crafty fibber at the end of March, when she's forced to disclose 1st quarter fundraising statistics?
It might not matter at that point, and that might be a gamble she's willing to take... but I wouldn't want manipulating heartstrings of her supporters to raise money as being the storyline propelling her toward November, from the moment she wins the nomination.
Isn't she also required to disclose cash-on-hand:primary, and cash-on-hand:general? Sounds to me like she's got a lot more money tied up in the general fund than she's comfortable with at this moment.
|
NJSecularist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:00 PM
Response to Original message |
23. I don't think she's severely in the red |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-06-08 11:01 PM by NJSecularist
But I do believe she is hurting. I do believe she underestimated what Obama could do in regards to fundraising. Can and will she go on? Yes. No question about it. But Obama has outraised her by a substansial margin and that affects her ability to send staff to future states like Ohio and Texas as much as she would have liked
Is she in any danger of going "bankrupt", so to speak? Probably not. But I do believe due to her lack of fundraising Obama will get first dibs in future states like Texas that she wish she had the ability to but can't. The type of advantage she had back in December and January in Super Tuesday states Obama now has moving forward.
|
K Gardner
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:02 PM
Response to Original message |
26. I just thought of that.. and I agree, its another trick. And she will raise LOADS with yet another |
|
"poor Hillary" scenario. Sheesh.
|
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:02 PM
Response to Original message |
27. She's out of money on the primary side. |
|
Here's her problem: She's been accumulating two stacks of cash. The first is for the primary, and the second is only for the general election. She cannot touch the money for the general election, but she raised it because she was trying to boast her way to the nomination. She hoped to cower her opposition with her huge war chest, so she pumped her numbers with money she cannot touch.
Now she's exhausted all her PRIMARY money, and that's why she had to go into her pocket for the loan. She has to try to raise more money for the primary, but she cannot use the contributors who have already maxed out for the primary. She has to shake loose money from contributors at the low end of her contributor lists.
Yes, she's in trouble in the primary.
|
thunder rising
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:04 PM
Response to Original message |
28. I hope it's true, but I donated to Barack again tonight just in case! |
Bullet1987
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:13 PM
Response to Original message |
30. I buy it...I think they are low on funds... |
|
People are giving them too much credit. If they were as savvy and smart as it would seem...why have they continued to underestimate Obama's appeal and strength? They wouldn't have had Bill Clinton trying to turn Obama into the "Black candidate." At the end of the day, a campaign is only as good as the handlers running it. As of right now...I can see them not looking past Feb.5 essentially thinking it would be over by now.
I mean think about it...not even a month ago, Clinton was heavily favored in MOST of the Super Tuesday states...and she only won 8!!! They invested a LOT in the fact that they'd have the nomination wrapped up by now. It was a SEVERE miscalculation on their part though.
|
blogslut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |
33. Here's an unpleasant thought |
|
According to campaign rules, that 5 million she loaned to her campaign has to be paid back. Is she raising this money in order to pay herself back? I certainly hope that's not the case.
|
dkf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
34. Wow. We don't even believe her when she says she's out of $. |
|
That level of distrust is pretty high.
I guess we do think that badly of her.
|
jwirr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:38 PM
Response to Original message |
36. I suspect it was a cash flow problem. |
karynnj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-06-08 11:47 PM
Response to Original message |
37. FWIW Here is what Candy Crowley said |
|
Remember this is Candy Crowley - which in English means take with a grain of salt.
1) At end of year, she had $38 Million, $20 million of which was for the general election. So, at the start of the primaries, she had only $18 million. 2) They have been coy about the money raised in January - (but links here said it was $13.5 million) 3) All of that was spent in early primaries 4) She needed the $5 million because she needed to ad ads in the NYC and Boston market as Obama improved there. Until 2 weeks ago, theer was no reason that would have made sense.
I think it is very possible because she will have to release the numbers eventually and it looks like this can not come out in her favor for months - so she would be caught when it could still matter.
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 10:04 AM
Response to Original message |
Laura PourMeADrink
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 10:08 AM
Response to Original message |
39. Good points ! I think she just said it to get some small donors nt |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 11th 2024, 06:57 AM
Response to Original message |