Skip to comments.Romney’s 9%
Posted on 02/04/2012 10:48:29 AM PST by Starman417
Now that the Florida Primary is over and we have seen how effective a carpet bombing campaign of negative ads can be, I thought it would be interesting to see exactly who provided the ammunition to each of the combatants. By ammunition I mean money, lots of money. I expected to see what we all knew to be true; Romney has the run of a well-stocked military bases ammo dump, Newt Gingrich is a kid in the back yard who found his dads stash of illegal firecrackers.
Off to the web site OpenSecrets.org I go. A great place to find all sorts of nifty little facts and figures politicians like to avoid talking about or to crow over. Rooting around like a French pig looking for very expensive fungi, I came upon the numbers for both Romney and Gingrich. There are no real surprises here. Romney took in $56,465,509 far outdistancing Gingrichs $12,648,565, a 4-1 advantage. Anyone following the Republican Primary knew this was the case even if they were not aware of the exact numbers. Romney supporters are always sure to let you know how much more money Romney has then his opponents. What is amazing is this one statistic. With all the resources Romney has to gather in funds there is one statistic he loses to Gingrich. Its you and me.
By you and me I am referring to people who do not attend dinners that cost more per plate then our mortgages. We, for the most part, are working stiffs without thousands of dollars to blow on someones political ambitions. Its not that I would not like to be in such a position one day. I would surely welcome it as I think most honest people would agree. The reality is that for most of us that is not the case, and may never be. Still, with what little money we can afford to part with, Romney doesn't get as much of it as one would think.
Of what the OpenSecrets.org defines as Small Individual Contributions Gingrich took in $6,260,961 compared to Romneys $5,232,273. Not a huge lead that Gingrich has over Romney at first look. What is significant is the percentage of the total amount that these contributions are relative to the total amount of money raised by each candidate. For Gingrich Small Individual Contributions make up 49% of the total rose. For Romney, only 9%.
Armed with this knowledge, one can draw many conclusions and come away with as many questions. I will ask the obvious. Knowing that Small Individual Donors only comprise of 9% of Romneys total contribution intake, exactly how much influence can the little guy or gal have on the mans politics?
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
What’s STOPPING BIG DONORS from giving to Newt or Santorium?
Is it because the BIG and the LITTLE people have NO FAITH in them?
Is it because the BIG and the LITTLE people have NO FAITH in them?
We've got a Freeper begging for a zot!
Check his posting history.
Oh, since I don't agree with YOU and the MOB, I am now a “zot”?
I'm simply stating the OBVIOUS.
People with money are NOT throwing it at Newt or Santorium. Nor are people VOTING for them. Mitt has the MAJORITY of delegates. These are FACTS whether you like them or not. Scream, yell, unhinge like Newt but this is REALITY.
Your choices will be:
1. Do a write in third party that will SPLIT the vote and ensure Obama a win.
2. Sit home and pout and not vote for Mitt who WILL be the nominee.
3. Vote for Obama.
Yes, CHECK my history and note how long I have been here on FR. Do that. I will also state that I have NEVER seen FR is childish and intolerant and devoid of reality.
“What, do you think your longevity here at FreeRepublic gives you a free-ride with respect to your behavior? “
No. But you asked about me. My behavior is fine. It is yours that is questionable. You would LOVE to silence my comments because you do NOT like them. Your emotions are getting the better of you.
“Jim has made it quite clear that the type of nonsense you are posting this morning is verboten this election cycle on FreeRepublic. “
Last I heard from Jim was that FREEDOM OF SPEECH matters to him. Apparently it doesn’t matter to you!
Mitt will win and be the nominee for the GOP; like it or not. That is reality. THIS is what YOU do NOT LIKE.
What a compromise to evil is being virtually demanded by the GOP elites.
Soros has even Trump in his pocket (I would have thought Trump was too smart for that, but I hear tell his last bankruptcy was bailed out by Soros. If you have documentation of a different account, furnish it please).
Florida not only saw a well-funded sh*tstorm of lies about Newt by Mitt. It saw about a hundred times fewer Newt ads than Mitt ads. If mere cash determined the number of ads, Mitt should have had at most a 4:1 ad volume advantage.
We don’t need a sh*tstorm of lies about Barack Obama. The truths will suffice quite nicely. The plutocrat Mitt seems to have beamed in from Pluto. And has about as much real data about Earth as Plutonians would.
I think that was the point of the post
Nor are people VOTING for them. Mitt has the MAJORITY of delegates.
I believe I read that Gingrich would have the most delegates if Fl was split according to the April 1st RNC rules. (I think that is the date)
You know this but I’ll say it anyhow. People like to jump on the bandwagon for the ride with who or what they think will be the winner. But they tend to jump off quicker than they jump on when the wheels start to fall off. I’m with Newt all the way. The battle has just begun. Go Newt.
By my rough estimates, In Florida, Romney spent approx. $22 per vote and Gingrich spent $7.50.
Big bucks makes the difference when courting prospective voters.
Mitt will win and be the nominee for the GOP;
like it or not.
thats as far as he will get...
like it or not Obama will wipe the floor with him...
Trump probably worked a loan guarantee from the Mormon Brotherhood.
Maybe because The Donald is calling in favors?
Newt has raised a million dollars more in small donations than Mitt. That indicates that the “little” people have more faith in Newt than they do in Mittens.
I have no doubt that the big donors do not trust Newt to continue the gravy train and crony capitalism that is destroying our country. That’s why they are buying Mitt, just like they bought Obama.
They can afford to buy candidates and the media. But they can’t buy our votes and we do NOT have to vote for their purchased and preferred candidate.
We (the little people) can change the game, if we just stop drinking their big money kool aid.
Ann Coulter was not born a brainless blond bimbo—the GOP RINO establishment and their big government buddies on the Left have made you and her that way—assuming of course that you have hair or are even blond or if you have ever bimboed for that matter;)
I agree that mitt would in all likelihood lose against hussein. But would it matter if Mitt did eek out a win? No. Because there is ZERO difference between them.
Could you put more words in caps for me, as I have a hard time understanding without them. Thank you.
The viking kitties just paid nmh a visit, it appears.
I thought I smelled ozone.
Maybe they know Romney's for sale to the highest bidder.
At one point I was sympathetic with Mitt too. Then I began to note current events involving Mitt and became much more skeptical. Mitt, to put it the most charitably, is a wild card with way too many dubious things pulling at his allegiance. To my mind he’d likely hose America like he hosed his sick dog Seamus.
I was as well, before I became aware of many things about him.
The thing with nmh was that he/she was very rude on multiple threads today. This is a privately owned forum, so...
Maybe I should add a question mark to ZOT?
Could be a much needed suspension.
Several months ago I came within a hair of getting ozoned by the Jim himself, and reluctantly held my tongue about Mitt even though “I can’t see why he’s so awful, or why Romneycare with its state scope is being equated to Obamacare with its federal scope.” But patience was a virtue. Jim, to put it frankly, may not be the most comprehensive critic of Mitt. Newt does a better job. The devil is in the details and it’s not a matter of just whether we can equate Romneycare to Obamacare. If it only went that far there would be a valid disagreement here. Mitt has been in bed with this sort of stuff and the bedbug bite marks show and each bite can be found in the news. At least with Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates, you could count on getting a chocolate each time. With Mitt you can easily get a dog dropping.
There is a Super Pac backed by billionaire John Huntsman, the other Mormon who ran for President and dropped out. That Super Pac is backing Romney and other Mormons running in various races around the country. The name of the Super Pac is “Our Destiny”.
I do believe that the DNC is pulling for Romney because they will expose the Mormon intention of setting up a Theocratic government. Too bad the RNC can’t take the blinders off while we still have a chance to nominate a candidate that will give us a fighting chance of correcting so many of the policies currently crippling the nation. Instead the RNC cheats against their own election rules to favor Obama Lite.
I actually get nauseous when I think of all the months that Glenn Beck cried and preached about the Constitution, only to find out that his religion wants to replace it with Mormon Theocratic Rule.
I just ordered a book by Tricia Erickson, “Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters?”. Tricia is the daughter of a Mormon Bishop (same rank as Romney) and she exposes how a Romney administration will be nothing but a front for the Mormon Council of 50, who will really be calling the shots.
I have no problem with any one’s choice of religion except when they propose to govern everyone else.
This “Mormon destined rule” doesn’t even have a good imitation of the moral standards of the Judeo-Christian bible. At one point in time it might have had it — at least on paper it did. (Individual notable Mormons still got into scandals.) But we’re looking at a “religious organization” on the brink of giving the nod to gay marriage, since after all Mitt, a bishop, did that rather than resign from his post. It is utterly gagulous and that has nothing to do with “bigotry.”
I bet half the voters in FL had no idea Bushop Romney was evn Mormon.
Big donors have no interest in shaking things up in Washington. Only the “little people” (i.e. taxpayers) do.
What the Big Donors are buying with their “contributions” is access. Access to the gravy train. That requires the status quo. The people giving to Romney are the same people giving to 0bama. They want access no matter who wins. These are the people who will be lining up for the next “bailout” or pushing the next SOPA. They don’t care about cutting spending in Washington. In fact, that is their worst nightmare.
“The viking kitties just paid nmh a visit, it appears.”
Never saw that one coming. /s
He looks evil in that pictuere.
They know Romney is for sale and as an "honest" man will stay bought for at least four years. You have to buy Obama at least once a year.
I doubt it, but if he is I will happily NOT vote for that fraud. Mitt is slime as is his entire campaign staff.
Since 2008 Mitt has had his vile staff carry out his orders to destroy any and all Conservatives who would challenge him. Mitt cares NOTHING for America's future. Mitt is just a power-lusting Statist.
Obama is at least honest enough to NOT LIE and run as a Conservative.
He and Obama are the "equal of evils." I do not vote for evil.
It will be so much joy to watch the GOP-e and Mitt and his foolish followers stare at a 2nd term for Obama. That would hopefully drive a final stake in the Democrat-lite Party (aka GOP)
I warned nmh this morning that his posts were ridiculous.
He was bound and determined to make his points.
Well, so is Jim.
Sad to see a Class of ‘98 member get zapped, but nmh can’t claim ignorance-—other than his own, of course.
Mitt and Obama both have low points and absolutely abysmal points, and they’re not quite the same. I’m inclined to hold the GOP more responsible since they are in a position where they ought to know better. The Rats, from Jimmy Carter onward, have made it plain they understand themselves to be just kiddies in a sand box with a bucket of play money. It’s hard to send hell to hell; it’s already there.
Since the week before Xmas, I have noticed a horde of the Class Of ‘98 that have gone around the twist and rode the lightning. Some were backing Willard, many were Paulbots, but almost all of them became condescending and downright mean.
I’m sure that is true. Even those that do know he is Mormon don’t know the political implications of what that means. America would be horrified to know what the aspirations of the Mormon Church are. We have to get the word out while we can still nominate an alternative to Obama.
The problem here seems to be that some very questionable policies, as well as some utterly gagulous ones, are being seen by a large body of willing people as a very mandate of God. These policies are not even close to what the founding fathers acknowledged in their shared Christianity or other bible-derived beliefs. Being “Mormon” is just another name. This s not just a practical danger if it gets enacted. It also will dog Mitt across the south, what some liberals mockingly call “Jesusland” (I wish it was that!) — I doubt Gingrich will let himself get blindsided much longer and hardly utter a public peep while Mitt blathers his lies.
My concern is strictly the political ambition of the Mormon Church and what it means to the loss of freedom in this country. Every move they have made financially and politically since Joseph Smith (who ran for President) has been to overthrow the government and rule from their Church. That they are morally bankrupt is a point well taken, but what do you expect from any cult that has perverted the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is chilling to think what such an organization would inflict on society if they realize what they believe is their Destiny. In the Florida debate they should have questioned Romney a little more on what he meant by his “provinence”.
I don’t know when it was decided (in the grand game of Calvinball) that Florida ought to have its primary in January, not April. It almost looks like Newt had his advertisement production schedule planned out for April. I mean the imbalance of publicity was ridiculous. 200 ads versus Mitt’s 15,000+? Newt (and other rivals nipping at his heels like Santorum) should well have been the “they” which you speak of, asking about Mitt’s “provenance” claims. And maybe they did, but in such a small peep they could not be heard.
True, the historic ambitions of the LDS from Smith onward are valid subjects of scrutiny. Trying to do that publicly in a way that doesn’t get hooted at as “BIGOTRY!” is another trick. A present tense attack (Mr. Magic Underwear is seeing XXX as his divine mandate, NOW) may be the best that can be hoped.
Sometimes we just have to take the initiative and not let the conversation be framed that way. I told a talk radio moderator the other day that we should examine the political aspirations of the Mormon Church’s candidate for the same reasons that we would question a candidate that wanted to institute Sharia Law.
We have to make it crystal clear that we are not talking about their rituals, ceremonies, magic underwear, nor would it matter if they hung from the ceiling of the tabernacle like bats. We just don’t want the Mormon Theocracy they are advancing taking away our liberty.
Interestingly enough, the radio host said I was the “insightful call “ of the day. I’ll be happy if we can just get people to Think and be informed before they vote.
Getting people to take a second look at the LDS may be hard, since their charm offensives within living memory include such “clean living” people as the Osmonds. The content of what they are hoping to institute today does matter. And it’s changed drastically from what the Osmonds projected, if that was ever accurate. The most damning thing seems to be the near flirtation with gay marriage. Mitt was a bishop, darn it. If we were talking about a Catholic bishop or a Baptist elder, say, there would be some stir about it. But he’s LDS? Yawn, goes the public. They shouldn’t yawn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.