• 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!

The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

Chomsky

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
85,265
Reaction score
71,902
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The president has blown past individual Democratic presidential campaigns in fundraising for his 2020 reelection bid. But the crowded primary field together more than tripled his 2019 cash haul, according to a CNBC analysis of Federal Election Commission filings and campaign statements.

No incumbent president this century has been so thoroughly outraised by a field of challengers in the year before a reelection contest. The main Republican challengers to President Barack Obama in 2012 barely took in more than the incumbent in 2011.

Meanwhile, President George W. Bush narrowly topped his challengers in fundraising in 2003, the year before he won reelection in 2004.

“The field is trouncing Trump in fundraising and that is unprecedented,” said Sarah Bryner, director of research and strategy at the Center for Responsive Politics.
Click to expand...

2019: Trump had $143.8 million in total receipts, versus $515.6 million for his Democratic challengers. That’s 28% of his rivals’ total. In individual contributions, the president’s $76.3 million made up only 16% of the $471.6 million raised by the Democrats.
Click to expand...

Source: (CNBC) The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

I'm posting this here GPD rather BN, due to it striking me as more of an analytic piece.

I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee. In other words, how much are those supporting Dem candidates giving vs those supporting Trump?

Well, just now, I happened to stumble across my OP article. And it was an eye-opener. If we take the article at its face value, it seems the Dems are clobbering Trump in fundraising by a factor of 3X in total, and by a factor of nearly 7X in individual contributions. I haven't done any further research or verification, but just thought I'd post the article 'as is' here in GPD.

A sad aside:

While money may possibly be a sign of support or energy for a candidate, I personally am disgusted that we even have to think in terms of money rather than democracy. If it were up to me, I'd drastically get money out of our political/electoral process.
 
Last edited:
Be careful about the trap that voters fell for with Hillary. She outspent Trump by a lot and still lost.
As an aside, I will personally enjoy watching Bloomberg piss away a good chunk of his fortune, trying to destroy Trump.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (CNBC) The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

I'm posting this here GPD rather BN, due to it striking me as more of an analytic piece.

I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee. In other words, how much are those supporting Dem candidates giving vs those supporting Trump?

Well, just now, I happened to stumble across my OP article. And it was an eye-opener. If we take the article at it's face value, it seems the Dems are clobbering Trump in fundraising -by a factor of 3X. I haven't done any further research or verification, but just thought I'd post the article 'as is' here in GPD.

A sad aside:

While money may possibly be a sign of support or energy for a candidate, I personally am disgusted that we even have to think in terms of money rather than democracy. If it were up to me, I'd drastically get money out of our political/electoral process.
Click to expand...


You and I won’t live to see that toothpaste go back in the tube, imo.
 
Chomsky said:
I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee.
Click to expand...

Bingo. This is why I never gave any weight to Trump's fund-raising. We'll revisit this topic when a Democratic nominee has been chosen.
 
You have Bernie Bros throwing money at Bernie.

You have Buttigeig supporters throwing money at him, and so on. Once we get to the democrat nominee, we'll see how much money one guy can raise.
 
Cardinal said:
Bingo. This is why I never gave any weight to Trump's fund-raising. We'll revisit this topic when a Democratic nominee has been chosen.
Click to expand...
I just modified my OP. Apparently 3X was the factor for the total disparity in fund raising. In individual contributions it's 7X! Yow! That says it all.
 
If Trump charged people to attend one of his rallies he'd be out raising them by wide margin. Is Elizabeth able to fill high a school gym lately?
 
This issue is akin the the posters that trumpet FOX NEWS eyeballs, while ignoring that the other outlets are spread out across a wider spectrum.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (CNBC) The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

I'm posting this here GPD rather BN, due to it striking me as more of an analytic piece.

I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee. In other words, how much are those supporting Dem candidates giving vs those supporting Trump?

Well, just now, I happened to stumble across my OP article. And it was an eye-opener. If we take the article at its face value, it seems the Dems are clobbering Trump in fundraising by a factor of 3X in total, and by a factor of nearly 7X in individual contributions. I haven't done any further research or verification, but just thought I'd post the article 'as is' here in GPD.

A sad aside:

While money may possibly be a sign of support or energy for a candidate, I personally am disgusted that we even have to think in terms of money rather than democracy. If it were up to me, I'd drastically get money out of our political/electoral process.
Click to expand...

As stated elsewhere, and IMO "Bernie Bros" won't support Warren, Biden, or Bloomburg. While many non-socialist, non-progressives won't support Bernie.

Do all those combined funds somehow go to the final candidate, or as I suspect, remain in the war chests of rivals?

So who cares if the total is greater, when Trump only has to campaign against one? :shrug:
 
Chomsky said:
I just modified my OP. Apparently 3X was the factor for the total disparity in fund raising. In individual contributions it's 7X! Yow! That says it all.
Click to expand...

The fact that's happening before we've even committed to a nominee is really something...but you didn't need me to tell you that.
 
swing_voter said:
You have Bernie Bros throwing money at Bernie.

You have Buttigeig supporters throwing money at him, and so on. Once we get to the democrat nominee, we'll see how much money one guy can raise.
Click to expand...
That a fair point. But it's never a bad thing to have highly energetic supporters.

Here's from further down the article:

No incumbent president this century has been so thoroughly outraised by a field of challengers in the year before a reelection contest. The main Republican challengers to President Barack Obama in 2012 barely took in more than the incumbent in 2011.
Click to expand...
 
Cardinal said:
The fact that's happening before we've even committed to a nominee is really something...but you didn't need me to tell you that.
Click to expand...
Your observations & insight, which I highly value, are always welcome! :cheers:
 
Hopefully, Warren and Sanders will each spend $500 million calling each other liars.

Keep burning up that political money in the primary, Democrats! Burn baby, burn up that money ASAP!:thumbs:
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (CNBC) The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

I'm posting this here GPD rather BN, due to it striking me as more of an analytic piece.

I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee. In other words, how much are those supporting Dem candidates giving vs those supporting Trump?

Well, just now, I happened to stumble across my OP article. And it was an eye-opener. If we take the article at its face value, it seems the Dems are clobbering Trump in fundraising by a factor of 3X in total, and by a factor of nearly 7X in individual contributions. I haven't done any further research or verification, but just thought I'd post the article 'as is' here in GPD.

A sad aside:

While money may possibly be a sign of support or energy for a candidate, I personally am disgusted that we even have to think in terms of money rather than democracy. If it were up to me, I'd drastically get money out of our political/electoral process.
Click to expand...
Are they counting self-donations like Bloomberg and Steyer? I notice that SIX dems have collected only three times as much as lil ol' Trump. :cool:
 
Acadia said:
Be careful about the trap that voters fell for with Hillary. She outspent Trump by a lot and still lost.
As an aside, I will personally enjoy watching Bloomberg piss away a good chunk of his fortune, trying to destroy Trump.
Click to expand...

She lost because of the Electoral College...But won the popular vote..
 
Acadia said:
Be careful about the trap that voters fell for with Hillary. She outspent Trump by a lot and still lost.
As an aside, I will personally enjoy watching Bloomberg piss away a good chunk of his fortune, trying to destroy Trump.
Click to expand...
Understood. But remember this, from the article:

2019: Trump had $143.8 million in total receipts, versus $515.6 million for his Democratic challengers. That’s 28% of his rivals’ total. In individual contributions, the president’s $76.3 million made up only 16% of the $471.6 million raised by the Democrats.
Click to expand...
*emphasis added

That huge disparity in individual funding surely can't be a bad thing.
 
I noticed that no one is brave enough to run against an impeached president from the GOP.
 
Acadia said:
Be careful about the trap that voters fell for with Hillary. She outspent Trump by a lot and still lost.
As an aside, I will personally enjoy watching Bloomberg piss away a good chunk of his fortune, trying to destroy Trump.
Click to expand...

Shhh, just keep agreeing that Trump can't possibly win, all the polls show it and the Democrats are vastly out fund raising him so Trump is toast. It worked last time. Let's do it again.

I doubt Trump can even win the Republican primary and even if he does he'll lose every state. The entire election will be decided in the Democratic primary over which of them can more totally destroy the other Democratic candidates. If smart, they all would raise every dollar they can, borrow every dollar they can and liquidate everything they each own in the primary, because whoever wins the Democratic primary will win by a near 100% majority vote. The November election is only a formality and probably the House Democrats should pass a resolution canceling the general election to make the point.
 
Bullseye said:
Are they counting self-donations like Bloomberg and Steyer?
Click to expand...
No idea.

I notice that SIX dems have collected only three times as much as lil ol' Trump. :cool:
Click to expand...
???

Oh come-on, you know the premise being presented: Dems are giving 3X as much in total, 7X via individual donors.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (CNBC) The 2020 Democratic field is outraising Trump by a huge margin — that didn’t happen to Obama or Bush

I'm posting this here GPD rather BN, due to it striking me as more of an analytic piece.

I've had posters here post figures showing Trump raising more than Biden or some other Dem nominee, as part of their arguments. But that always struck me as an incorrect argument, because to claim 'Trump is out-raising a specific candidate' does not reflect that the majority of Dem donors may unite in their support of the eventual nominee. In other words, how much are those supporting Dem candidates giving vs those supporting Trump?

Well, just now, I happened to stumble across my OP article. And it was an eye-opener. If we take the article at its face value, it seems the Dems are clobbering Trump in fundraising by a factor of 3X in total, and by a factor of nearly 7X in individual contributions. I haven't done any further research or verification, but just thought I'd post the article 'as is' here in GPD.

A sad aside:

While money may possibly be a sign of support or energy for a candidate, I personally am disgusted that we even have to think in terms of money rather than democracy. If it were up to me, I'd drastically get money out of our political/electoral process.
Click to expand...

I didn't read your linked article but I'm assuming it didn't account for Bloomberg's spending. He has said he's prepared to spend $2 billion on his own or another dem nominee.
Two billion reasons Bloomberg could unseat Trump | Fox Business
 
Chomsky said:
Good point. She had the people behind her.
Click to expand...

So did Gore. Two of the five Supremes that voted for Citizens Divided came from Bush, who lost the popular vote. The two from Trump support CD. More leftists vote third party than rightists, self-immolating in the Electoral College.

I would advise a look at the $$$ on hand for the R-alphabet groups and individual R-candidates compared to those of the D’s. R’s spend early and often, defining their opponents. D’s wait too long to spend.
 
Chomsky said:
No idea.

???

Oh come-on, you know the premise being presented: Dems are giving 3X as much in total, 7X via individual donors.
Click to expand...

Just curious since I saw an article a few weeks ago that had Trump way ahead of top three as well as small donor totals. Bloomberg isn't accepting donations but Steyer is so I wonder if his own money is comingled with individual donors in this report.

One thing I'm sure off the other candidates are going to have to do some major spending in California real soon. It seems like every commercial break has a Bloomberg and/or Steyer commercial. Broadcast radio is the same thing. California has a ton of delegates and electors. Not that I'm asking for more commercials, mind you. :cool:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom