dagblog - Comments for "WHEN $5.00 IS WORTH MORE THAN $5000.00"

You could have picked $5M.

DF — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 18:31:00 +0000

In reply to DF, well, guess we'll have to

You could have picked $5M. My point is that even though CU has had some impact on the funding picture, it does not appear to be having a big impact on actual races. Again, SuperPACs are spending a ton of money against Obama, but he's still winning. An explanation of this might be something like the marginal benefit of dollars spent per votes acquired was already near zero prior to CU. The disparities you're otherwise speaking of existed before CU - $50k/plate dinners, etc.

Josh has a theory on the late-game peripheral money dump:

Remember, Sheldon Adelson has already given you the money. It’s sitting in the bank account. And not even sure legally these SuperPACs would be able to give it back. The logistics of needing to do something with the money are real — especially if you’re going to need to explain to your billionaire how Romney lost and you still had money left over that you didn’t spend. But that brings us to the other key point … The Money, the big big money.

The folks who run these PACs and Committees have consultants who place the ads, they have houses who make the ads. It’s all a pretty open secret that these things work very incestuously and by hook or by crook the folks running running these organizations get a big big taste of the action themselves. So you may be wondering if that Romney SuperPAC ad running non-stop in Chicago and Dallas isn’t money going to waste. But I guarantee you that the commissions being made off that spending amount to blindingly large bonanzas for the people actually running these outfits.

So that’s my read. We got the money. We ain’t giving back. So let’s just put it everywhere we can. The third beach front home is just as sweet whether the ads mattered or not.

I agree with what you're saying in principle, it just doesn't seem to have much of anything to do with CU. The only linkage you've explained is using SuperPACs as boogeymen in the fundraising game, but that's not very convincing by itself. Politicians are always asking for money and always telling you about how their opponent is outstripping them in the race for a fatter war chest.

But what was supposed to happen, that this election was supposed to be awash in untold sums of money that would forever change the game, has simply not manifested. You can even subtract all SuperPAC spending from this election, but you still end up with exponential growth in spending strictly based on traditional, pre-CU fundraising. This would still be the most expensive election in history by a long-shot without one CU dollar.

DF, well, guess we'll have to

Aunt Sam — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 18:14:17 +0000

In reply to While I'm very much on board

DF, well, guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

After speaking with many and doing massive reading relating to the impact and perception's of CU, the huge amounts of 'shadow funding' being dumped by these sources into congressional and the Presidential campaigns does make it necessary, for those without this shadow funding, to obtain more donations from their constituents in attempt to 'level the playing field'. (There is so much money left over in these PACs they are now running massive ads in some outlier areas because there is no 'room left' in their base target groupings. Ironically, here in Alaska, and all know this state doesn't really matter, we are suddenly getting massive television ads being funded by Crossroads and other like entities.)

I, and am sure millions of others, get emails from congressional campaigns, as well as from Obama's campaign, advising how many millions in ads, etc. is now being spent by these PAC's to defeat them. They are requesting donations to be able to compete.

As of this a.m., many of these shadow fund participants are being disclosed (I think depending on state) and the contributors are not happy - even admitting if they knew they would be 'outed', would not have contributed.

I used the $5000 mark only as a base amount.

While I'm very much on board

DF — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:44:55 +0000

In reply to WHEN $5.00 IS WORTH MORE THAN $5000.00

While I'm very much on board with the general thrust of this piece, I don't think it has anything to do with Citizens United. You could already donate close to $5k last cycle, pre-CU. The lion's share of money raised in a post-CU world is still from bundling of maxed out individual donors, not from Super PACs. Per Open Secrets, Super PACs have spent about $250M this cycle - most of it on Romney.

One of the overlooked stories of this cycle is how CU didn't change the game.

Means a lot Emma, it's time

Aunt Sam — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 03:28:51 +0000

In reply to Excellent!

Means a lot Emma, it's time we focused more on the effects of the political corruption on the masses. It's more than apparent that the media, pundits nor the vast majority of the politicos 'get it'.

Thanks Jolly, appreciate.

Aunt Sam — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 03:26:27 +0000

In reply to You misconstrued the rich

Thanks Jolly, appreciate. And I'm sure you're right about the motive for picking up that dime. sigh.

Guy was a believer in

Michael Maiello — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 02:27:41 +0000

In reply to You misconstrued the rich

Guy was a believer in efficient markets. Guess he was compelled by economics.

You misconstrued the rich

jollyroger — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 02:24:47 +0000

In reply to Brilliant work, Aunt Sam. $5

You misconstrued the rich man's motive. He didn't feel a need for the dime himself; he was afraid that some person who really did need it would pick it up if he left it. Love the post, BTW, Aunt Sam.

Brilliant work, Aunt Sam. $5

Michael Maiello — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 00:13:25 +0000

In reply to WHEN $5.00 IS WORTH MORE THAN $5000.00

Brilliant work, Aunt Sam. $5 sacrificed definitely means a lot more than $5 million written off as "the cost of doing business" from a person who will never miss it. Though, in a way, these guys always miss it, even when they don't need it. I once witnessed a ludicrously wealthy man stoop to pick up a dime off of the sidewalk.

Excellent writing, thanks for this.

Thanks so much. Still more

Ramona — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 22:37:58 +0000

In reply to Meant to tell ya glad you're

Thanks so much. Still more breathless than I would like when I'm puttering too long, but, damn, if my hatred for being out of service is any kind of healer I should be good to go any day now.

I sent your link to my FB page. Thanks. I hope everybody in those long lines is angry enough at their AG to vote against whatever it is he stands for. He could have allowed five weekends for early voting but it looks like he only allowed one, and that was because he was forced to. They can't win legitimately so they try to win with dirty tricks. And they feel no shame. Ugh.

There really isn't enough of

Ramona — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 22:33:41 +0000

In reply to Thank Ramona, It's too often

There really isn't enough of this out there. Instead we see the same pundits out there making the same arguments for or against without a single new thought.

I love these stories. Thanks again, Auntie.