CE Week #7: “Obama uses money advantage to boost advertising, presence”
McCain holds final fundraiser for RNC
WASHINGTON – Sen. John McCain stepped into a ballroom at the Grand Hyatt in New York Tuesday night for what was likely to be his last fundraiser of the 2008 presidential campaign.
But while the event, which was expected to net between $8 million and $10 million for the Republican National Committee, will provide a much-needed infusion for the GOP nominee, it will do little to whittle down the massive financial advantage that Sen. Barack Obama is using to dominate the electoral landscape.
Exactly how much money Obama has raised will not be clear until next week, when the two campaigns are required to report their September fundraising totals to the Federal Election Commission, although some strategists are openly speculating that he could approach $100 million for the month. That would shatter a record Obama set in August, when he brought in $67 million.
As the first presidential candidate to run a general-election campaign entirely with private donations, Obama has a significant fundraising advantage and is using that imbalance to swamp McCain on the airwaves and in building turnout operations coast to coast.
Voters in large swaths of Florida will see Obama television commercials dozens of times before catching sight of a McCain ad. A drive across Virginia will wend past 51 Obama field offices, compared with 19 for McCain. “It’s given them resources to compete in multiple battlegrounds in all dimensions – on the ground, through the mail, with media, everything,” Chris Kofinis, a Democratic political strategist, said of Obama’s fundraising success. “I think people will look back and say this was one of the most pivotal decisions in his campaign.”
Since accepting $84 million in public funds, McCain has been barred from raising money for his own campaign. He has sought to keep pace with Obama’s effort by hosting RNC fundraisers like Tuesday night’s event in New York. The party committee raised $66 million in September and has begun to expand its presence on television with ads featuring blistering attacks on Obama.
At the same time, the RNC is leading an effort to challenge the legality of millions of dollars in “un-itemized” donations that Obama has collected. Under FEC rules, his campaign does not have to document the names of donors who give less than $200.
The RNC is keeping a growing list of phony donors and unexplained credit card charges that they believe point to more than a simple inability by the Obama team to keep track of all the money flowing in. Steve and Rachel Larman, a Missouri couple who vote Republican, told local reporters that they found a $2,300 charge for a donation to the Obama campaign on their credit card statement that they could not explain. Patricia Phillips, a Virginia Republican, had a similar experience, she said, when she opened her MasterCard statement last month to discover a $5 charge from the Obama campaign. “I thought, ‘Oh, my! This is not from me,’ ” she said.
Other donations have arrived under such obviously bogus names as Edrty Eddty and Es Esh.
Experts called it a common problem on an uncommon scale – while there have always been donors who, for a host of reasons, tried to circumvent federal election rules and give campaign contributions without providing their real names, they are more frequent with Obama because of the volume of donations his campaign is processing.
“I’m sure they have a system in place to screen out improper donations,” said Scott Thomas, a former FEC chairman. “Their problem is they have such a massive donor base and so many of these coming in that it’s hard to keep up.”
Obama campaign aides said they have followed a policy of sending immediate refunds to people who contact the campaign to say that they have been charged for a contribution they did not make. “While no organization is protected from Internet fraud, we have taken every available step to root out improper contributions, updating our systems when necessary,” said Ben LaBolt, a campaign spokesman.
So far, the complaints have not prompted FEC action. And Obama’s controversial decision to forgo public funding and instead raise money on his own is paying huge dividends.
The most noticeable evidence of his spending advantage has been on the airwaves, where, in some states, Obama been running seven or eight times as many commercials as McCain. Evan Tracey, an analyst with the Campaign Media Analysis Group, called the disparity stunning.
“McCain’s in a shouting match with a guy holding a bullhorn,” Tracey said.
Video games sport ads for Obama
|
WASHINGTON – Too busy playing video games to watch presidential ads on television? Barack Obama has found you, too, by becoming the first presidential candidate to buy ad space inside a game.
Eighteen video games, including the extremely popular “Guitar Hero” and “Madden 09,” will feature in-game ads from the Obama campaign in the final weeks before the election. The ads – appearing on billboards and other signage – remind players that early voting has begun and plug a campaign Web site that encourages people to register for early voting.
Obama campaign officials said the video game ads target 10 states that allow early voting, including several battleground states: Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Colorado.
“These ads will help us expand the reach of VoteforChange.com, so that more people can use this easy tool to find their early vote location and make sure their voice is heard,” said Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro. The campaign did not say how much it cost to launch the ad blitz on gamers.
The idea of embedding advertising temporarily inside a video game is relatively new, having only begun about 18 months ago, and Obama is the first presidential candidate to buy space, according to Holly Rockwood, a spokeswoman for Electronic Arts Inc., whose company is featuring the Obama ads in nine of its games.
The Democrat’s ads are aimed primarily at game players who like sports, including NASCAR, the NBA, the NHL and skateboarding.
Rockwood would not say how much the ads cost, but she said they are running on the Xbox Live versions of the game through Nov. 3. They began earlier this month.
“It reaches an audience that is typically hard to reach: young males, roughly 18 to 34,” Rockwood said. “That’s very appealing to our advertisers.”
Rockwood declined to say how much revenue the company generates from selling ad space in its games.
For those who still associate video games with clunky “Pac-Man” or “Space Invaders” consoles, here’s how in-game advertising works: The Xbox 360 console connects to the Internet, so it can be updated with new features, including ads. In the case of “Burnout: Paradise,” the game came out in stores in January, but the Obama ads were only inserted this month.
Obama made a great decision by deciding to raise his own funds instead of taking the $84 million in public funding from the government. To me, his choice seems like the obvious choice. In a political era such as this, where money plays a huge role in politics, I don’t understand why McCain would choose the option that puts a limit on the amount of money he can raise for his own campaign. Obama showed that he trusted his party enough to count on them for donations. By opting for public funds, McCain has indirectly shown that he distrusts his party.
On another note, the article about Obama advertisements being in video games was very interesting. It is proven that younger people are more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate. However, it is also proven that younger people have very minimal voter turnout. This is one of the Democratic Party’s main problems. By putting Obama’s face and slogans in video games, the Democrats have found a loophole in the system where accessing their younger voters is much easier. This was probably a very costly decision, but I can see it paying off on election day.
Connection: This article is directly connected to the Federal Campaign Act of 1974. The two main goals of this legislation were to tighten reporting requirements for contributions and to limit overall expenditures. “Exactly how much money Obama has raised will not be clear until next week, when the two campaigns are required to report their September fundraising totals to the Federal Election Commission…” The Federal Campaign Act required disclosure, meaning the candidates have to file periodic reports with the FEC.
As we have discussed earlier this week in class, and in previous weeks, advertising is a key element to campaigns. Without the money or the name recognition, nobody will vote for you or feel compelled to get involved in your cause. And as this article shows, Obama is obviously taking every chance he gets to set up donations or facilities that support his desired position as president. He shouldn’t feel any shame in receiving all of these donations either; he is currently winning in the polls after all. Plus, the claims of the Obama campaign holding a conspiracy in the way they receive their donations is false. Every person is able to personally donate $2,000 and accumulate a total of up to about $10,000 with outside resources. And as for the republicans who seem to have unwanted charges, the Obama campaign has given them refunds in their brought up claims.
In the second article that’s attached to the first, where Obama is advertising through video games, this is a very clever tactic. He is reaching the toughest target audience, young people, and is giving them the tools on where to go in their community to vote. We have come to know that a lucky election year will receive a 50% voter turnout, and barely any of them are younger than age 25. We have discussed several times in class why there have not been more efforts by government to get programs out that will increase voter turnout and political participation; we have found our first attempt through these video games. However, I’m not so sure I would want those playing video games multiple times a week, people that may not have as well established political knowledge, to vote. It may be better for them to just stay at home if the first time they are hearing of Barrack Obama is through their X-box. And, on the downside of this attempt, these advertisements could become quite similar to subliminal messages if they are repeated and subconsciously seen in the video games enough times. The idea was correct, but the course of action could have been refined to a different field practice for the advertising.
***Connections (if you didn’t catch them in the above paragraphs): Voter turnout rates among youth, Limits on Donations, and Money/Momentum makes Victory.
I hear about the money spent on campaigns all the time but it never fails to amaze me. Granted, ever since Mr. Kautzman read the Halloween statistics the large amounts of money spent on presidential campaigns has seemed relatively low. I actually learned something new from this article. I did not know that Obama was the first presidential candidate to run entirely on private donations. I guess that was a really smart move because he has obviously managed to spend a lot more money than McCain. The republican party is doing its own fund raising, but, as the article stated, it will do little to match that of Obama’s spending. The one thing this article does make me wonder is whether Obama is ahead so much because of the economic crisis or because he has so much more money. As for Obama putting ads into video games, that is a very clever. However, it is a sad fact that Americans play so much video games that a presidential candidate sees the necessity of spending the large amounts it must cost to advertise through x-box live. I feel like if these males 18-34 who originally would not have voted go out and vote for Obama it would not be entirely fair, but when is politics ever.
Connection:I would say that this article has a lot to do with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974 which had the goal of limiting the overall expenditures of a campaign. I would also connect it to the McCain-Feingold act. This article directly talked about how much each candidate was raising. Because McCain took the $84 million he can’t fund raise. This brings up another topic we talked about in class. The opening of the article mentioned the republican party raising money, which is something the democratic party can’t do as easily because they don’t have as much money.
I would like to start off by saying how CRAZY it is how much money candidates spend on campaigns! What did the article say Obama raised in a month – $100 million?
I personally think that it was a smart move on Obama’s part to privately fund his campaign. This gives him the chance to fundraise as much money as he possible can while McCain is fixed at $84 million. Especially with the race as close as it is, it is important for each of the candidates to reach out to the public as much as they can; Obama obviously has the advantage if he can supply more ads, stickers, pins, and posters. The effect of this stark contrast in funds is quite evident. Obama simply has more ads circulating. During the last debate, the candidates were criticizing each other about negative campaign ads and whatnot. McCain was complaining that Obama’s negative campaign ads outnumbered his by a significant amount. Well, yeah! Obama has way more money to do so. This does not make negative ads “good”; I am simply saying that with that much money, it is no surprise that Obama would be using it to his advantage.
Connection:
This is a great example of the benefits of the three M’s that candidates need in order to be successful. Momentum, Media, and Money. In terms of this article, it is obvious that Obama has a clear advantage with money. Because he has money, he can finance his campaign successfully and influence more people. Money also ties in with media. Obama can have more TV coverage with ads because of his money.
Yesterday, during the final presidential debate, McCain attacked Obama’s fundraising tactics. McCain criticized Obama for spending more money on negative campaign adds than any other candidate history. Obama is spending more money, because he has more money to spend. In fact, “some strategists are openly speculating that he could approach $100 million for the month. That would shatter a record Obama set in August, when he brought in $67 million.” Instead of accepting government funds (which would limit him to about 84 million dollars over the entire duration of his campaign) Obama chose to be the first presidential candidate to run a general-election campaign entirely with private donations. Now, that decision has granted some major advantages. One huge advantage includes more advertising. For example, “Virginia will wend past 51 Obama field offices, compared with 19 for McCain.” Since the media is disgustingly influential in American culture, this increased media coverage will undoubtedly help the democrats.
Moreover, I don’t understand why accepting private contributions depict Obama as a “bad guy”. He is merely accepting money that the people are offering. Plus, the amount of money made is a reflection of Obama’s popularity; most contributions are small.
Connection: McCain-Feingold act explains the maximum and minimum amounts of money one can give to a candidate and/or a party. These rates change as inflation changes. This applies to Obama’s campaign, because is receiving large amounts of money from individuals; some even speculate that Obama is reviving these funds illegally.
Obama has made tremendous grounds in covering the reach of advertisements. As being the first President to reach an audience associated with video games has taken campaigning to a whole other level. Not only will this get himself publicity, but it will encourage a whole different spectrum of people to get involved in voting; primarily 18-34 year-old males. In this sense they have targeted men, who are less likely to vote and the age at which young people tend to not vote.
As for the issue on illegal millions that Obama has collected, the problem could be true in many respects. The truth is, Obama is receiving atrocious amounts of money from different donars and as this article reported, when receiving that much money it is hard to keep up. However, Obama’s aides have stated that any money that has been received that people report not giving has been returned. In other regards, Obama is trampling McCain in televised commercials as well as other ways of campaigning. I recently watched an Obama campaign that was really comforting. There was no bashing on McCain, no jibber jabber and then Obama repeating “I support this ad”, it contained Obama speaking on what he stands for and how he is going to be a president for the people.
Connection: This article relates to the Federal Campaign Act of 1974 where we saw limitations set on the amount of money candidates would be able to raise and the amount individuals could donate. One of the things that this act created was the rule that any money spent or received would have to be documented and shown to the Federal Election Commission. I think this is a great thing because it limits the ridiculous amounts of money candidates spend, but in reality, like Mr. Kautzman said about Halloween expenses, the money they raise is not really that much money.
Once again this is another example of “money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Obama is living this out this old saying farther than many would have expected. The amount of money Obama has raised, almost $100 million for this month alone shows how much support he is gaining. At the same time I also wonder that if McCain hadn’t accepted the $84 million, how much he would have raised. Obama’s figures seem to show that he has a lot of supporters. Because McCain has not been able to accept the huge amounts of money, his support may not be showing. I think maybe we could make another poll by the amount of money each candidate receives. We could replace the popular vote with how much money each candidate raises and use that as the estimation of who will win the presidency. Why not? None of the other polling ways are accurate.
Obama has really played big when it has come to media, money, and momentum. With the amount of money he is raking in he is able to gain more media attention which has led to his growing momentum. His momentum has gained his most likely Ohio, Florida and Virginia. I do question whether buying space on a video game is worth spending campaign money on though. I wonder if the media hadn’t pointed it out if people really would have noticed.
Overall, Obama has obviously gained enough money to remember his campaign through playing his video games somewhere between fixing the government and giving the people what they want.
I commend Obama on his decision to reject government money for his campaign not only because it symbolizes his digression from a large dependence on government support, but because that demonstrates that there is a whole slew of people that support him. If there are a whole bunch of people donating, then that means there’s a good chance that there will be a whole bunch of people who will exercise their rights to vote. Participation will increase and political scientists will be able to look back to this day in happiness. Or despair. The unprecedented sums coupled with a new advertisement method geared toward semi-impressionable audience is almost sure to bring in some more votes. I’m just glad that someone is taking advantage of a never-before thought of medium.
Now, about this large sum of money. It seems peculiar that some people are complaining of charges to their accounts to the Obama fund that have occurred mysteriously. Maybe they’ve been the unfortunate victims of identity theft by those who really wish to support the Obama fund but are too poor to do so. However, the FEC should be concerned over this. If this is to become a trend, more and more people will associate the loss of money with Obama, and that could mean bad news. It’s the FEC’s jurisdiction to ensure that campaign funds are legal. So what the heck are they doing just chilling on the sidelines?
Connection: In our book, and in class, we discussed all the mandates that were put in place by Congress to ensure that no unfair acts would go unpunished. So Congress created the FEC in order to keep tabs on all sorts of illegal activities. Now they’ve got deal with a whole bunch of mysterious donations to the Obama fund. But they won’t because there is no easy way to do so.
I think that Obama’s choice to forego the $84 million in public funds was a good decision, because he knew that he would be able to raise more money than that, and therefore he’d be able to spend more money than McCain could. McCain made the right decision for himself, and his campaign. He most likely wouldn’t have been able to raise that much money on his own, and I don’t think that people really realize how much money that Obama would be raising. They’re estimating about $100 million for the month of September alone. That figure is just mind-blowing. This gives Obama a huge advantage, because he has much more money to spend on advertising, which gets Obama out there to the people much more. As for the phony names, and supposedly false charges, I don’t think that this is a direct result from the Obama campaign. This kind of stuff happens, and because the amount of donations coming in is so great, it’s difficult to stay on top of everything. I think that the Republicans are just mad that Obama has so much more money that he can spend in the race than McCain can.
I think that the Obama ads in the video games are really amusing. It’s a great way for Obama to reach much more of the younger demographic that just sit around on their lazy butts all day playing their Xbox, or PS3, or whatnot. It’s a little like subliminal messaging, and I’m all for that. Why not? They’re not doing anything illegal, and it works. I know that if it was real subliminal messaging, then that would be illegal, but it’s not.
Connection: This correlates a lot with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974. It talks about how both campaigns have to soon post reports of their spending and whatnot for September.
I think that these two articles were very interesting. I am glad that this one was on the blog while we have been talking about the election contribution stuff in class because it helped clarify some things. It is funny how even though the government has put so many regulations and rules on how people can contribute money and how much they can donate that there are still ways around them. Since the parties do not have to record donations of two hundred dollars or less, anyone could donate unlimited chunks of money as long as it was less than that. So there are still ways around the FEC. Someone always finds ways around the rules.
Also, it was probably very smart for Obama’s campaign to advertise in video games. With all of the new technology coming out, I would not be surprised if this type of campaigning became much more popular in the future, and if politicians began to find other ways to invade the privacy and space of the public. But if the advertisements are just in the background pictures of the games, will it really send out a message to anyone or get anyone to change their vote? Probably not.
Connection: voter registration advertised in video games, voter registration also in chapter 10 vocab. Definition: A system adopted by some states that requires voters to register well in advance of election day. A few states permit election day registration “same day registration”.
Both candidates made smart choices in their campaign finances. McCain’s acceptance of the $84 million to finance his campaign was smart because McCain cannot raise funds very well, and nowhere near the efficiency that Barack Obama can. However, as large a sum of money that McCain got, the money the Obama campaign has raised dwarfs it by quite a lot. Barack Obama’s extremely well-developed and extremely effective fundraising abilities have allowed him to outspend McCain will plenty of money to spare. The estimate of money raised this month in $100 million. $100 million raised in just one month. That’s impressive. Normally, it’s the Republicans that outspend the Democrats, but if the Democrats can capitalize on Obama’s fundraising tactics in future elections, the Democrats can reverse the traditional advantage the Republicans had that Obama is now using; outspend your opponent in battleground states. In this campaign, however, the Republicans are crying foul about how the money is being raised, saying that some people are violating the donation limit set by Congress in order to help Obama. Some of the claims are legitimate, just as the claims against the Republicans in previous elections had some merit to them (Edrty Eddty, seriously??). Money helps with momentum and media, and if elections were based on those three things, Obama would win in a landslide.
Connection: Campaign Financing, McCain-Feingold. The most recent campaign reform bill, McCain-Feingold as it is commonly known as, sets a limit at $2000 dollars per person, which adjusts to inflation, every two years. The article is about Obama’s phenomenal amount raised and whether it violates McCain-Feingold.
McCain received about $84 million from the federal government. Barack Obama has probably made that in two consecutive months. Huge disparity. Money + Media + “Mo” = Victory. Obama has raised more money than any other presidential candidate ever has. Plain and simple, Obama SHOULD win.
Also, typically, the Republicans have dominated the Democrats in raising money for campaigns, mostly because the Republican party caters to the interests of rich people. So with the Democrats out “earning” the Republicans, two things come to mind.
1) McCain does not seem to “rally the troops” and get his Republican base out there donating money to his cause. Some Republicans view McCain as a lackluster candidate and do not really want to support someone who is not a “strong” Republican.
2) A new way of donating. Through internet donations, more and more people are able to donate to a candidate easily (America is all about easy). Also, Mr. Kautzman brought up the less than $200 non-disclosure issue. People are able to give as much money as they want, as long as the increments are small. I am not saying this the way Obama is getting so much money in contributions, but it is in the realm of possibility.
As for the second article, I think that ads in videogames are ridiculous. If someone gets their political information out of NBA Live ‘09, their vote should be invalidated. Also, who is Obama’s target audience? “Young males, roughly 18 to 34″… who live in their parents’ basement? Okay, that may be a little drastic, but seriously, if you are banking on the vote of people who play videogames long enough to notice that there is an ad for Barack Obama right under Steve Kerr, you either have way too much money, or are very desperate.
Connection: McCain-Feingold Act (BCRA). Obama, seemingly, found ways to bypass the limits on contributions to campaigns by giving money in small increments (not proven, but possible). Also, this type of fundraising is probably what McCain was trying to stop, so it is kind of humorous that McCain is against someone who has, basically, defeated his legislation.
This article is evidence that money is a big part of campaigning. “The most noticeable evidence of [Obama’s] spending advantage has been on the airwaves, where, in some states, Obama been running seven or eight times as many commercials as McCain”. To have the money to out show your opponent to this degree will dishearten supporters of an opponent and pump up your own supporters. Obama made an easy decision in raising his own funds instead of taking the 84 million dollars in public funding from the government. McCain’s choice to take the 84 million, though putting a limit on the amount of money he can use for his own campaign, was a good choice. With how the support for him has been faltering lately I think that he would have had a hard time rounding up enough funds to keep fighting against Obama.
I think that the idea to put advertisements into the games was a great idea. This will push the younger voters, who are less likely to vote, to vote. A good thing, since younger voters usually will lean towards the democratic side. I am curious though to how much it has cost Obama to put up these advertisements, and if it will pay off enough for future candidates to do it again.
Connection: The last section about video gamers connected to the chapter six term “idiot”, the people who do not play close attention to and participate in politics. Obama has found a way to appeal these idiots who will be especially helpful to him since the “ads target 10 states that allow early voting, including several battleground states”.
It is amazing to me how much money these candidates can raise. However, I think it just reinforces the fact that the United States is a country of extreme excess. I do know that presidential (and all branches of government) candidates need to raise money and use the money to help their campaign. But honestly, 100 million dollars just in one month seems to be over doing it. But I do applaud the fact that someone has this much power and is capable of reaching that amount of money.
I do think that because of Obama’s fat lead over McCain financially, Obama definitely has a substantial higher chance of winning. Obama has the capability to spend money anywhere. This is evident in the 51 Obama field offices in Virginia while McCain’s 19. Or in the fact that Obama is resorting to subliminal messages in video games as a campaigning method.
I do think that the ‘phony donors’ might end up looking bad for Obama. People might think that he is purposely doing this, and well, maybe he his. (But I highly doubt that.)
Altogether, I think that Obama’s fundraising techniques have paid off, and it will only end up benefiting him. It obviously shows that he is a likeable person in whom people can relate to.
Connection:
This situation is a bi-product of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974. This act made it so that candidates are required to disclose sources of campaign contributions. This means that campaigns need to know who gave what and how much. But this article says that there might be phony donors donating to the Obama campaign. But Thomas, the former FEC chairman, says that it is just because of their massive donor base.
It amazes me how big a gap there is in monetary donations between McCain and Obama. While McCain is limited to $84 million, Obama has been shattering records, many of them set by him. So it looks like he has a possibility of bringing in $100 million dollars in September and he has been raising money all of October as well. This is an insane amount of money and the gap between the two candidates is very beneficial to Obama. Obama has been able to funnel money into key battleground states and that has allowed him to take the lead in some of those states. What I want to know is where any surplus money will go after the Election is over.
I find it interesting that Obama is the first presidential candidate to put ads in video games. The ads were also well placed I think, “[They] target 10 states that allow early voting, including several battleground states: Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Colorado.” It is also smart that Obama is trying to get as many people registered as possible because many of the people he is trying to reach are part of his voting base. “It reaches an audience that is typically hard to reach: young males, roughly 18 to 34.” Not only is it trying to get young people voting it is also reaching voters that don’t normally vote in elections.
Connection: “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” There is not a better example I can think to use with this quote then this. Not only does Obama have tons of money, he is using it to acquire big leads in battleground states and McCain can’t keep up because he is limited to $84 million. Money is key in any presidential race and this is a good example of why. If you outspend your opponent, you have a better chance of winning.
I was amazed to hear that Barack Obama had shattered a campaign fundraising record (and that he had set the old record, and the record before that, so on and so forth). It seems like Obama has the media and public eye right where he wants them. While the American public focuses on McCain’s occasional mishaps concerning the economy, Barack Obama is able to rake in the cash, whether it is publicized or not. And putting ads into video games? Genius! It seems that the voters still desire the change that Barack Obama is promising with his candidacy. One particular quote seemed to sum up Obama’s success with fundraising: “As the first presidential candidate to run a general-election campaign entirely with private donations, Obama has a significant fundraising advantage and is using that imbalance to swamp McCain on the airwaves and in building turnout operations coast to coast” (Matthew Mosk). Congratulations to Barack Obama for his achievements, but the race isn’t over yet. Obama needs to keep his momentum as November approaches. Otherwise, McCain and Palin might be able to creep up unsuspected in the ratings. Since the Republican Party is usually able to raise more money than the Democratic Party, one can assume that the Republicans will attempt to find better fundraising opportunities come this time in 2012.
Connection: I would definitely agree that this article corresponds with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974. Because this law “provided public financing for primaries and general elections, limited presidential campaign spending, required disclosure, and attempted to limit contributions,” it opened up the door for the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which created a loophole for Section 527 groups. Obama has been wise to raise money in such small amounts from many different contributors. At the rate he’s moving at, he will most likely win the presidency easily.
I think that it is crazy that McCain only accepted the $84 million! Was he not confident in his party? I believe Obama made the right decision to raise his own money. By Obama taking that risk of raising a lot of money, he showed that he had faith in his party. However, what Obama is doing with his money may be pointless. Putting hidden ads in video games? HA! It makes me laugh. Nobody is going to be paying any attention to a little ad about Obama in a video game. Maybe he did it to target the younger voters, but that just doesn’t look good on his part. Although, I feel like Obama is making more of an effort to get noticed and McCain is just going with it. This idea of the ads in video games was very clever and unique to a presidential campaign.
What is McCain doing with his money? I have not heard of anything big that he has done with his money except put ads on TV.
It is definitely clear to me now that the younger Americans are certainly going to be leaning toward Obama. It seems like Obama is the candidate who tries to impress everyone, while McCain does it the old fashioned way and plays by the rules.
CONNECTION: this connects to voter turnout rate because I feel like this is with out doubt the most controversial race yet. Because there are so many historical factors taking place in this competition, Americans will want to contribute to making history happen even if they do not believe in political efficacy.
It really was brilliant on the part of the Obama campaign to forgo the federal money. I wonder, though, how they knew they would get such a huge influx of grassroots money. This whole ploy could have backfired grievously, and yet, it is probably the smartest thing done by Obama’s campaign. It’s just plain fascinating. Another fascinating thing is the advertisements in the video games. It’s absolutely hilarious, too. It could help get out the younger generation that tends not to vote because they’ll see the ads. I would doubt this, though. I think they’ll sit in the basement and continue to play their video games. Even if it doesn’t help, I’m so glad it happened. It makes me proud to be an American; we product place candidates for the presidency into live video game update codes. It’s awe-inspiring.
I don’t think the Obama campaign’s money needs investigating. If some people are getting charged for donations they didn’t give, then it’s internet or credit card fraud and it happens all the time to anyone or anything that allows transactions. I don’t think people should throw a fit at the Obama campaign; throw one at the credit card companies. They’re the problem here. Another thing: why can’t people give small increments of money and get around campaign finance laws? Loopholes are built to get around laws. If the McCain campaign and others are angry that Obama supporters are using the loopholes, then all loopholes should be gotten rid of. However, most laws have loopholes. Napoleon Bonaparte wasn’t convicted of crimes against humanity (posthumously) because crimes against humanity only apply to civilians. Napoleon was a bad guy, though, a greedy little monster. My point: there are loopholes everywhere. I think that Americans should exercise their right to use them until they lose them.
Connections: Campaign financing. McCain accepted the federal money and is confined by it. Obama did not accept it and is getting record amounts of cash. People might be cheating in giving donations to Obama’s campaign by giving multiple donations of under $200 that add up to more than $2000+ (whatever inflation has caused it to be). All the money Obama is getting is allowing him to advertise more, getting his name out and causing name recognition as well.
The beginning of this article does not make the Obama campaign look good with these fradulent charges on Republican credit cards. It seems a little strange that this story never hit the airwaves or the newspapers and it also is weird that identity thefts are using those credit cards to make charges to their candidate of choice.
Both candidates made smart choices on deciding their own method of gaining campaign money. Obama was smart in his choice because on his own he has raised large amounts of money in the course of a month. Each month he has broken his own record of money raised from the preceding month. As the article said last month Obama raised $67 million and this month he is expected to rake in over $100 million which is a very large sum of money to collect in 30 days. I did find it a bit ridiculous that Americans spend more money on the 1 night for Halloween than on a political campaign over a year. McCain also made a good decision on taking the federal money of $84 million because without I don’t think he would have been able to raise that much on his own.
Connection: This campaign year, the norms of spending are having the exact opposite effect. As stated in our book, usually the more you spend the more likely the candidate is to lose but this year seems to be the opposite. The more Obama spends on advertisements the more popular he becomes.
Just another good reason not to play vido games. Uhg to never be able to escape him… I bet he’s going to pay park rangers to put ads on bears so that even the least likely voters nomads and cavemen will want to vote.
Seriously this has to cost him so much money, but hey, what does he care he is making hundreds of thousands a month. I am not going to say that this is a terrible strategy, if you have the means then go ahead and advertise yourself. But it makes me wonder what posses the minds of men that they would be so willing to donate an unprecedented amount of money? That leaves me to wonder if there is some amount of fraud above the inevitable or if people truly view him a Messiah.
Connection: The money and the fraud is very muvh like what we diccussed in class about McCain-Feingold, there where many loopholes that have clearly been exsposed. It also brings up the question “do we really want these kind of people to vote?” of course Obama and his people and Democrats in genral do but I don’t. Then agin it may be wased money on idiots (greek word) who wouldn’t vote anyway.
I think there is something people don’t get here. Everybody makes this out like Obama is this bad guy. But what do the actions of his contributors have to do with him? Maybe these criminals are violating the law and sending him too much money under false names in order to contribute more to his campaign, but what is he supposed to do? Reject all funds under a suspicious name? I mean, his administration is doing all they can by rejecting all funds above 2,300 from one name, what more can they do?
And, if this means anything, it means that people like Obama. They want to support him to the point in which they are actually violating the law. But isn’t it at least good that a well liked candidate is well supported? Isn’t that democracy? I mean, thank God for this law that prohibits the rich corporations from overpowering the Republican campaign so that the democrats don’t even stand a chance. The race is finally even. And I think now the budgets for each candidate’s campaign simply demonstrate who is more liked.
As for the video game ads and anti-McCain ads, you know McCain would be doing it if he had the money. Obama didn’t make the game; he’s just playing by the rules of “hardball”. Nobody can blame him for being smart.
I felt the same way in class today when Kautzman was referring to this happening as a character flaw of Obama’s when we were discussing the new Contribution Laws. [For the record: I did not intend for it to be taken that way - Kautzman.] I feel like people forget why they were there: to put a check on the Republican party. It’s working and the better man is doing better.
In response to Claire… Your following statement made me laugh because it seems entirely accurate during these tense political times: “I think that the Republicans are just mad that Obama has so much more money that he can spend in the race than McCain can” (Claire Loomer). McCain probably did make the correct decision when he chose to take the $84 million in public funds. It’s a crazy situation, though, since usually the Republicans have no problems at all with raising money for their campaigns. However, this election race has proven again and again that you should always expect the unexpected. Obama’s momentum has carried him far, and it seems McCain is slipping farther down in the polls each day. Is there any hope left for John McCain and Sarah Palin? Only time will tell… But not a great deal of time, since Election Day is just around the corner, and most swing voters have already chosen one particular side to lean to. Claire, I also found humor in another one of your statements, this time concerning Obama’s ads inserted into video games: “It’s a great way for Obama to reach much more of the younger demographic that just sit around on their lazy butts all day…” (Claire Loomer). Short, sweet, and to the point.
In response to Cyle Christianson, McCain cannot “rally the troops” to support his cause. He took the federal deal, so he is very limited and probably is not allowed to accept any new donations. He does not have a chance of being able to compete advertisement-wise with Obama would raises incredibly large sums from private donations each month. So, the Democrats are out “earning” the Republicans as you put it, because they are not limited. I do agree that a large number of people could be giving more than $200 in total by continually donating individual sums of under $200. That is definitely a possibility. I do not agree that “someone gets their political information out of NBA Live ‘09, their vote should be invalidated.” I do not even have any ideas as to how getting information that way should invalidate their vote since there really is not any information there other than something to the effect of a poster. But, if that is the only way that they know who is running, they can learn who the other guy is when they see the ballot. However, in the world of advertising, it is all about name recognition to ultimately get your message across.
In response to Ryan,
I wish Obama WOULD pay park rangers to put ads on bears. It would actually be really funny and he could definitely pull it off. He has the money to do whatever advertising he wants to do and he should take advantage of it. Putting those ads in the video games was an excellent idea. It reaches out to the young generation and Obama is probably going to get their votes. He even is now the first person ever to put a campaign ad in a video game. I bet if McCain had that money he would put out as many advertisements as he possibly could and instead of reaching out towards the young generation he would probably reach out to the elderly. But luckily for Obama, he has a wide range of supporters who are willing to donate large sums of money. And I think that people want to donate to Obama because they support him for is good intentions and his policies not because they think he is a messiah. But even if there is fraud he is still receiving a lot of real money from real supporters and he is making history while doing it. I think that only a small portion of his donations could be fraudulent.
In response to Ryan
So what if Obama wants to advertise wherever he wants. He has the money to do so, and you have to believe that if McCain had as much money as Obama does, then he would be advertising just as much. Obama isn’t doing anything criminal. It’s not his fault that McCain is kind of a failure at raising a lot of money. I think that this just goes to show that more people want Obama, and are willing to make a contribution to help get him elected. Why do people automatically think that there has to be fraud going on just because Obama has raised a lot of money? There is inevitably going to be fraud, but not nearly as much as you seem to be suggesting. And big deal if people think that he is a Messiah. They can believe whatever they want. Would you be complaining about this if the results were reversed, and it was McCain who was raising all of this money? Obama has a whole lot of people donating small amounts ($20, $50, $80, etc.) to his campaign, which adds up to a lot. Don’t fault someone just because they’re successful. I guess we’ll see if all of this paid out in the end come election day.
In response to Brennan Waller’s comment I would have to say that Obama did in fact make a great decision by raising his own funds. However, I believe that McCain’s only chance at getting enough money was to take the 84 million dollars from the government. Before he decided to take this money, he was only raising about 50 million dollars. So by taking the money, he actually is giving himself a better shot at winning. Yes, it might show that he distrusts his party, but I think it also shows that he knows his strengths and weaknesses. He knew that he wouldn’t be able to raise as much money as Obama, that’s just not one of his strengths. So by taking the extra 3 million that he wouldn’t have otherwise been getting, he was actually helping his party out.
I also do not think that just because Obama puts advertisements in video games, young people are going to vote for him. Although this could work and at least has the potential to work, I highly doubt it will. Most ‘gamers’ are too enthralled with the game, that they don’t even realize what is printed on the sidelines. Plus, how many people actually play that one single video game? I guess it doesn’t really matter though because Obama has enough money.