From August 20th:
According to a report filed Saturday with the Federal Election Commission, the RNC raised $5.8 million in July–including roughly $66,000 in transfers from other party committees–and has $7.6 million in cash-on-hand to use for the election battle against incumbent Democratic President Barack Obama.
The committee carries $17 million in debt.July fundraising numbers say a lot, RNC and DNC say little – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com BlogsThe Democratic fundraising arm has $20.1 million in cash-on-hand to use for the president’s re-election, and carries $11.2 million in debt.
So, in reality, looks like neither of them is managing their money perfectly. It's all relative to how quickly they'll pay it off, what their standing is with their lenders, and expected income. Looks like both of them are in a position to pay their debts with relative ease, contingent upon donations and fundraising.
"Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton
The way to raise revenue streams is to create small companies that can grow to bigger companies to sell to Americans more of what Americans, and the rest of the world, buys. For cryin out loud... my Levis aren't even Levis anymore and they aren't made in the US. No jeans are. No textiles at all.
Everyone cries that we need a massive military to defend ourselves... no, we need a manufacturing base that can wshift gears in times of war and crank out the artillery as we need it. Worked very well in WWII and served us very well after in the civilian manufacturing sector long after.
raised far more money.
The Republican Political Machine in the 2000s was the Neo-con machine, also born of Chicago Politics, gasp, at the University of Chicago to be precise, four decades previous.
There are two ways to "buy" (somewhat legally) a politician, with contributions or with stock and seats on the board. Campaign contributions are a poor indicator since savvy multinationals will grease the wheels on both sides.
You've got to love it when the people who adamantly resist ANY sort of restriction on campaign finances -- even restrictions on anyonymous, unlimited donations -- whine because Obama raised too much money.
I said what I said for a reason. Where was the energy and the focus in the 2010 mids? It was from the tea party and their candidates. In the primaries, the RNC kept trying over and over to force establishment candidates at the electorate. It failed to a degree that long time contributors not only stopped giving, they intend to never give again unless canidates align with their views more than estaliblishment politicians. So they dont contribute to the RNC they contribute to individual candidates they feel deserve their money and effort.
Its no surprise to me. RNC establishment is all about control of process and incumbent re-election, not governance or policy or even candidate worthiness. Its about who can win and who can raise money. Both parties are like that and its a big part of the problem. Unlimited funds arent, transparency and morality in voting are---on both sides. When, honestly was the last time a senator or House rep recused themselves from a vote? They cant because they would never vote at all