Reason Magazine’s blog has some sobering numbers that will give a lot of conservatives pause:
Four years ago George W. Bush released his fundraising numbers for the third FEC quarter: $49.5 million. This week the top four Republicans released their numbers:
Rudy Giuliani – $11 million
Mitt Romney – $10 million
Fred Thompson – $9.3 million
John McCain – $6 millionThat’s a combined $36.3 million from the party that holds the White House, compared to $59.2 million from the top four Democrats.
As the Washington Times writes, “Republican presidential fundraising has declined by 27 percent since four years ago, and the Democratic presidential field is outraising Republicans by 63 percent.”
During 2004, Bush raised $367 million to Kerry’s $329 million. In 2008, it’s likely that Hillary will have as much as a 2 to 1 money advantage over her Republican opponent.
It’s really astounding that after Bush was re-elected in 2004, Democrats were fretting about a permanent Republican majority and the need to soften their stances on controversial issues in order to win elections. And now Rudy is on record as saying that the GOP enters 2008 as underdogs. How quickly things change.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
We’ve become like the dems used to be. Racked with intra-party fighting and at a serious loss with regard to fund-raising. It is NOT looking good…
October 8th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Scott,
Yup. And the Dems have become like the Republicans. They’ve seemingly picked their nominee in advance, have a excellent ground operation and far more money.
The times are a-changin’.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
[...] post by LJ and software by Elliott [...]
October 8th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
LJ, Also, it’s being given to the successor. Just like our times of old.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
There’s an obvious difference between a reasonably popular incumbent president raising reelection funds and a party trying to retain office, but without an incumbent, and no apparent front-runner trying to raise funds. This is not a mystery. Morale in the party is low and morale in the out of office party is high. It’s very rare for a party that has had the presidency for 8 years to keep it for another 4. 1988 was a rather unique situation, because of Reagan. But, if we get our act together, and reunite after this internecilne warfare, we can win next year.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Dave,
As brutal as the GOP primary has already been, it’s going to get much, much worse. The Romney-Rudy fight over the past few days is just indicative of this. Rudy’s staffers are whispering stuff to reporters about Fred and vice versa. McCain has attacked Fred and Romney recently. Huckabee is having mysterious, fake emails distributed about him. I tell you, things will be so bad by time someone emerges victorious, morale will be even lower then it is right now. I think it will be impossible for the Conservative Coalition that re-elected Bush in ’04 to reunite because there is no unifying figure running for the nomination. Each GOP candidate represents their own segment of the base.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
This just in… we suck
October 8th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Oh, LJ, don’t be such a pessimist! We are going to be alright!
October 8th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Tommy, Are you being sarcastic or realistic?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:45 pm
I agree that we should still be fine in the presidential considering that a Hillary nomination should motivate a lot of the base. What worries me more (or makes me hope more for a Hillary nomination) is the state of the senate. The democrats are almost certain to pick up seats as there are 9 GOP seats in play (MN, OR, CO, NH, ME, VA, NM, NE, and AK) with only two real Dem seats up (SD and LA). While it’s only the Kos’ of the world that are talking about the dems reaching 60, things still are worrisome if the dems get close to 60.
October 9th, 2007 at 3:33 am
Not that this makes things much better, but what do the figures come to when all candidates’ funds are added together. The numbers above only use the top four candidates to come to the $36.3 million amount. When the additional funds from Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee and the others are added in, it will be closer to the number Bush raised four years ago.
Regardless, I don’t think these figures represent the dismal abyss some here see. Yes, the Dems are doing very well, and yes the GOP has seen better days. However, in a year where we have as many as five viable candidates (plus one marginal but popular one – Paul) during a time of war, high gas prices, and a very unpopular president, $36.3 million (more, actually) isn’t really all that bad. Remember, a lot of people are still hedging their bets on the GOP side. The Dem race is much closer to a done deal, allowing prospective doners to give money more freely. Once the GOP side winnows down to three or even two main candidates, and the “President Hillary” factor really takes over the minds of more GOP voters, I think the cash will start rolling in.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:15 am
AJ,
You could be right. I think the problem with that explanation is that I’m not sure that all of these different faction will unite around one candidate. I am pretty sure that Ron Paul supporters that threw $5M his way aren’t going to support Giuliani, not with his hawkish views. Also, even though so-cons support so-cons like Fred or (at least now) Mitt – it’s hard to imagine someone that values hard work and competence that supports Romney eagerly donated to Thompson if he gets the nominee. I don’t think the divisions will foster one big happy GOP family a year from now. I hope I’m wrong.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:24 am
It’s a very different primary from four years ago. Besides the unusual number of front runners dividing the pot, people are withholding donations until an obvious front runner emerges. Right now, the money is all being used to run a contest within our party, not win the U.S. office.
It seems like two very different scenarios. I’m not worried AT ALL.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:34 am
I’m hopeful for the Republicans this year, but I’m also totally pessimistic. Reason’s article simply put a spotlight on one of the greater negative trends. Another trend is for minority groups to feel fully ignored and insulted by the Party of Lincoln.
All the financial numbers show that many interests are fully confident in betting on the Democrats. Part of this is the relentless MSM drive to depict Billary and the Democrats as inevitable. Also, the traditional Clintonian contortions indicate that, no matter how socialist the candidate’s views, that well-oiled and well-connected political juggernaut is keeping open its options to recapture the national center in the general elections. All the pandering Billary has done to mollify the far left for the primaries has come with caveats and hedging that will permit her to recalibrate her position without getting caught flip-flopping.
On the right, it seems everyone in the base is still tepid, while the main interest groups from all corners of the GOP’s big political tent squabble over who should determine the party’s direction. Meanwhile, the Bush years have largely driven off the libertarians and other self-described classical free-market liberals. And without a logical heir to what is now Bush’s party, there is currently no single figure strong enough to provide convincing leadership to effect unity.
The GOP is waiting to see who will capture the center of the party. Billary and the Dem crew are keeping their focus on conquering the center of the country.
My prediction is that the Republicans will gradually regroup around whomever wins the primary. The party will go on suffer greater losses in Congress. If the party can hold onto the Presidency, it will rally around the new President, who should be in a position to formulate the party’s agenda. If the party loses the White House, I see a long, long period where the internecine fighting within the party worsens considerably before a distinct winner or consensus emerges.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:37 am
I’m always perplexed by the perception that the Democrats are doing better…this is only money to be used against members of the same party, in primaries. It’s not like head to head, Hillary 100 million vs. Rudy 40 million, but everybody treats it that way. The reality is that it’s Hillary 100 million vs. Obama 100 million as it stands right now. It’s apples and oranges.
October 9th, 2007 at 8:54 am
Scott,
A little of both.