• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama campaign had twice the staff as Romney last month at same cost

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,814
Reaction score
8,285
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Aren't Republicans the ones who claim they can do a better job with the economy? Not only are they paying campaign workers nearly twice as much as Obama pays - but they are getting poorer results from those higher paid workers - yet they claim they would run the government better than the Dems. :lamo


Obama campaign had twice the staff as Romney last month at same cost

... the president appears to be getting a much bigger bang for his buck.

According to an analysis by the Times Data Desk, part of the Los Angeles Times, the Obama campaign had 901 people on its payroll last month, and paid them a median salary of $3,074 a month, or $36,886 a year.

The Romney campaign, in contrast, had 403 people on its payroll, and paid them a median salary of $6,437 in August, which would mean $77,250 a year.


Then there is this little 'interesting' bit when you look at the thread titled: Fla. voter registration fraud charge has ties to Romney
The Romney campaign has taken a different tack. It is relying on the Republican National Committee for the bulk of its voter registration and mobilization program this fall.
 
I'm sorry, but as far as the presidency goes, this has little to do with anything.

How a person runs a campaign for president does not equate to how they run the presidency once elected. Obama ran a SUPERB campaign in 2008 and he looks so far to be running a great campaign this time. However, I personally think Obama is a lousy president and I will not be voting for him.
 
Oh I think it speaks to the underlying principles both parties hold.

Democrats want to help as many as possible but that equals a lower wage per person, however it does seem to prove the old adage, 'many hands make for light work'.

Republicans look to a smaller group they are more lavish with, but the hard work gets outsourced to a crony who may or maynot be effective but is very loyal.

Campaign for vs holding the office. Campaigns are working with people energized for your success... once in office it is working with folks dedicated to your failure.

See the difference? :peace
 
Oh I think it speaks to the underlying principles both parties hold.

Democrats want to help as many as possible but that equals a lower wage per person, however it does seem to prove the old adage, 'many hands make for light work'.
Must be why they're always criticizing places like Walmart for paying their employees too much instead of helping as many hands as possible.
 
It contradicts Romney's theme that he's the better manager, IMO.
 
It contradicts Romney's theme that he's the better manager, IMO.

Well if we were running a "Who can run their campaign better" and that's it, you would have a point. However, managing a campaign and then the presidency are two distinct different things and just because you are great (or bad) at one, does not automatically equate to you being great (or bad) at the other.
 
Well if we were running a "Who can run their campaign better" and that's it, you would have a point. However, managing a campaign and then the presidency are two distinct different things and just because you are great (or bad) at one, does not automatically equate to you being great (or bad) at the other.

I agree, but Romney's whole argument is that it IS all the same thing. He argues that he would be a great manager of the country because he successfully managed a private equity firm. And (very arguably) the Olympics! His case is that he's a great generic manager who you can plug into anything that needs managing and he'll do a stellar job. Well ... not so much.
 
I agree, but Romney's whole argument is that it IS all the same thing. He argues that he would be a great manager of the country because he successfully managed a private equity firm. And (very arguably) the Olympics! His case is that he's a great generic manager who you can plug into anything that needs managing and he'll do a stellar job. Well ... not so much.

In Romney's defense, Obama pretty much did the same thing with the "community organizer" routine. You're right in that it is a politician acting like a politician.

However, we know better that being a good manager of one thing, doesn't make you a good manager of another thing automatically.
 
Obama's campaign is making calls to their base daily, asking if they want to help out (making calls, registering voters). These are unpaid volunteers (lots of seniors and college kids).
 
Back
Top Bottom