Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Campaign Cash

            The campaign trail is a battle field – a battle for cash that is! Until Election Day when those at the forefront of the political race hope they’ve done enough wining and dining to get our votes, the drawn-out battle is focused on more than just candidates shaking hands and kissing babies. Like all marketing strategies, a political campaign needs the right fuel to keep the machine running. This particular fuel is green, and comes in the form of good-old American cash; personal checks, money orders and Super PAC donations are also acceptable, in case you were worried. Regardless of what form the money is in when it is donated, it is undeniable that money speaks volumes, especially when it comes to the presidential race. If money is any estimate as to how people feel, it has recently been telling us pretty loud and clear that Mitt Romney and the Republican Party is wanted by the American people. Politicians who change their views are often labeled as being flip-flippers. Well, it looks like the donors are the flip-floppers in this case, as a large number of donors have flip-flopped over the last four years. Back in 2008 many traditionally right-winged Wall Street-ers and Republicans joined President Obama’s bandwagon for ‘Change.’  The change these people were looking for appears to have never come through, as these folks have once again switched sides. Romney and The Republican National Committee have outraised Obama for the second month in a row. Team Romney has recently raised the stakes bringing in a whopping $106 million during the month of June compared to Team Obama’s $71 million. The power to bring in the big bucks from the once money magnet man Obama seems to be slipping as his cult of personality is taking a hit to the promises of deregulation and tax cuts by the GOP nominee.

            However, the battle for cash isn’t an easy battle to win. Obama’s campaign strategy has largely been fueled by smaller donations with a grassroots-like support system. Though Romney was getting by with supporters giving the maximum amount they could, it appears this Republican is starting to cash in from smaller donations as well, an area where Obama has led the race from the beginning. The Democrats recently took to social media outlets like Facebook asking followers to “help close the gap by chipping in $3 now,” stating the Obama Campaign and Associated Committees are “building our campaign the right way – with small donations from grassroots supporters like you.” Regardless if the money comes from Average Joes or five-figure check-writing millionaires, money plays a large part in who comes out on top. Who says money can’t win you the race? Just ask New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg what it took to be elected in the five boroughs. Whether it is because of flip-flopping donors or the fact that Romney is a wealthier man than Mr. Obama, it is clear money is now pouring in at a much faster rate into the Romney Campaign. Even Obama, who has been noted by some to be the greatest fundraiser in political history, may find himself defeated in this battle for campaign cash. Perhaps Obama’s presidential honeymoon stage is coming to an end and his divorce from the Oval Office is unfolding before our eyes. We may not know until November if this is what is actually happening, but it looks like the American people are speaking and numbers don’t tend to lie.

2 comments:

  1. Interesting points. I agree with you that money does unfortunately speak as a result of the citizens united ruling but have to note that there is a key point the national media is missing in their coverage of this massive spending influx. A few individuals pumping millions into a candidate does not equate to the level of support expressed by thousands donating what they can in small amounts. Instead this speaks more to the joke that is the citizens united ruling combined with increasing income disparity nationwide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. edged – Thanks so much for your comment. I’m glad to see you read my piece and found my thoughts to be of interest to you. I can definitely see how the Citizen United ruling can be argued to cause corruption when it comes to political campaigning. However, I also see where the Supreme Court Justices were coming from when they chose to uphold the First Amendment: our government cannot rule to restrict advocacy if doing so violates the free speech clause. Since you too agree money speaks, to rule that a person, company, organization, or union cannot donate money/provide expenditures in support of a candidate or political party would therefore be denying donors their right to free speech/expression. Laws and Amendments cannot be upheld and enforced for some and not for others. Therefore, it is important to practice consistency and overturn past rulings which may have broken this consistency. When rights and liberties are taken away just once, it sets a precedent that they can be taken away again in the future.

      Delete