T-Paw’s Freedom First PAC has published its fundraising totals for the final three months of 2009:
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, one of the early front runners for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, raised nearly $1.3 million for his political action committee in the final three months of 2009 from more than 2,750 donors, according to papers to be filed with the Federal Election Commission this weekend.
The figures, impressive in the early going for the 2012 nomination, highlights the organizational strength of Pawlenty’s political action committee, “Freedom First.”
…The committee spent nearly $400,000 during that period, including contributions to the campaign committees for Senator-elect Scott Brown, Rob Portman, Doug Hoffman, Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C. and the Minnesota Congressional delegation.
By comparison, former Alaska Republican Gov. Sarah Palin’s PAC took in $732,000 during the first six months of 2009. She has yet to file her year-end report.
In the past few months, Pawlenty has also visited both Iowa and New Hampshire, two crucial early test states for presidential campaigns. Advisers say Pawlenty will not travel as much over the coming months because of the legislative session in Minnesota, where some have accused him of shirking responsibilities as the state’s governor while he mounts his presidential bid.
After spiking around the time the Governor announced the formation of the PAC, media coverage of his activities has died down as of late. Fortunately for him, this story should get some attention. People who ignore and write off Pawlenty do so at their own peril. With arguably the most impressive governing record of any potential 2012 candidate (considering context), top-notch skill for retail politics and blue-collar appeal, he could surprise a lot of people.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Well, I am still a backer of Sarah PAC and Team Sarah, but I am glad that my second choice is doing well, just in case, my first choice does not run.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
According to Ben Smith at Politico – noone comes close to this – Mitt’s PAC numbers – http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Romney_touts_PAC_spending.html?showall
January 29th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
All Pawlenty Has done is fundraisers. I bet if Palin spent all week doing fundraisers she would be at 15 to 30 million.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Nicely done, Mr. Pawlenty.
I’m sure that number ($1.3 million) will raise some eyebrows. One caveat. I’ll bet it’s getting easier to raise money as a Republican than it was during the 2006 and 2008 campaigns. Mr. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have created some urgency for conservative-minded donors.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
Isn’t that what she has been doing? $100,000 from TPC. $75,000 for a speech there. Several million for a book (and the accompanying book tour) here. A deal with Fox News…
January 29th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Well dang it… I’ve got 3 posts in a row now because #5 didn’t come out the way I wanted it too.
It was supposed to have “Snark Alert” at the top and “End Snark Alert” at the bottom, but I put it in the less than/more than signs, so I guess that piece got erased. Double Dang it!
Sorry about the triple post.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
We need Tim in the race for 2012.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
I am not her accountant Ogrepete, but yes she appears to be making a lot of money from her book. As for her speaking, while she is getting well paid, charities and candidates are getting a portion of the money made. So in short, Sarah PAC is not the only bussiness going on in her life.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
2. Mitt’s PAC raised $2.9m during the entire year 2009, whereas Pawlenty’s number, $1.3m was only for the final three months of the year.
January 29th, 2010 at 3:57 pm
He’s my attack dog!
January 29th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
As I thought all along, neither Huckabee nor Palin will be Romney’s challenger in 2012, it is more likely to be Pawlenty. Still think Romney wins out though.
January 29th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
#8
Ohio Joe.
I didn’t mean to come across as mean-spirited and I hope I didn’t come across that way. I apologize if I did.
I was just poking fun at AKReport’s comment in #3.
January 29th, 2010 at 4:15 pm
hamaca,
Actually, that isn’t surprising. The natural donation cycle roughly runs:
December, January, February: Nothing
March, April, May: Lots of money.
June, July, Augest: Nothing
September, October, November: Lots of money.
(It’s more complex than that, but that is just to give you a rough idea.)
So Pawlenty’s PAC had a third of the top money months, plus the added benefit of all pent-up demand that he reaped when he finally started up his PAC. So it doesn’t surprise me at all that he took in a little less than half of Romney’s total.
Still, that is quite an achievement. I can’t wait to see Sarah’s and Huck’s numbers.
January 29th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
“With arguably the most impressive governing record of any potential 2012 candidate… “
Yeah, Anthony, I suspect you are right — You WILL get arguments on that.
January 29th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
13. Sarah and Mike have daily jobs speaking on the political issues of the day by admonishing and rebuking Obama’s poorly planned policies.
Will someone just give Mitt a job, too? Anything! Please!
MSNBC? CNN? Animal Planet? Pat Robertson?
January 29th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
LOL #15
Good one.
I suspect that if Mitt Romney wanted “a job,” he’d have about 4 zillion offers within the first week.
January 29th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
He’s too COOL for a “job”?
Anyway it’s snow season..time to hit the slopes at his mountain home. Lotsa fun for all.. Be very careful on those skis, Mitt!! Whoooaaa…
January 29th, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Good work by TPaw. He has an admirable record and is a legitimate option for 2012. And congrats to Romney for nearly $3 million for the year. In a couple of days, we will see the rest of the reports for SarahPAC and Huck Pac.
What doesn’t show up here is the economic impact of other fundraising activities by these potential candidates that accrue directly to the benefit of individual GOP candidates and committees. In a few cases, more money has been raised on others behalf than was collected by the PACs themselves.
January 29th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Great jobs Tim and Mitt. Keep it up.
January 29th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
“Mitt Romney’s PAC just announced that he’d raised $2.9+ million last year.”
“And also brags that he spent more than $120,000 helping Republican candidates.”
(Kinda small out of $3MM?)
Hmmm… a few details:
Chris Christie for Governor, Inc.
New Jersey Governor
$6,800 cash contribution (Wow!)
McDonnell for Governor
Virginia Governor
$5,000 cash contribution (Only $5K, really now?)
Toomey for Senate
U.S. Senate (PA)
$104 ( COME ON!!! )
January 29th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
#20
Apparently, you weren’t around for the last round of discussions on PAC fundraising and PAC spending. Huckabee does no better or worse on donations as a percentage of funds raised than Romney according to my last analysis, done six months ago.
PAC’s have overhead. PAC’s are limited to $5,000 campaign contributions for each cycle. Mitt did personal fundraising for McDonell, Scott Brown, and others… I’m not sure about Christie. Those dollars would not go through the PAC, and would not be reported by the PAC.
Mitt Romney’s PAC reports monthly. Mike Huckabee’s only reports twice a year.
You do not want to fight this battle before researching all sides, Mr. Superstar.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Pawlenty’s flying under the radar, but he’s making a lot of friends, which will help him in 2012.
Once Romney collapses, I could imagine a consistent conservative like T-Paw picking up the pieces.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Obviously, you don’t know Pawlenty’s record. Its a lot more liberal than Romney’s, but I realize your so anti-
Romney, that you lose all prospective. Including his MinisotaCare.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Thunder,
So now market driven reforms are “liberal” and government mandates and bureaucracy are “conservative”?
January 29th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
$104?????????????????????????
January 29th, 2010 at 7:44 pm
Thunder, apparently you don’t know Romney’s record so well, or Pawlenty’s for that matter.
Sarah and Mike. At least Romney donated money to campaigns, unlike Huck who charges for campaign stump speeches which have netted a loss for at least one campaign.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
21.
Can’t Mitt just write checks totaling $120k to his favorites this past year ???
Where the heck did the other $2,900,000 go?
Was Mitt shopping at Staples for overhead supplies? Can’t he at least swing a discount there?
I demand an investigation immediately!!! Where’s that Acorn dude with the hidden camera? Is he outa jail yet?
January 29th, 2010 at 7:50 pm
S&M Superstars,
Apparently you didn’t see my reply on another thread.
Mitt’s Free and Strong America PAC donation to Toomey: $104 in-kind contribution
Sarah’s SarahPAC donation to Toomey: $0.00
Huck’s HuckPAC donation to Toomey: $0.00
Mitt’s endorsement of Toomey: Check
Sarah’s endorsement of Toomey: ???
Huck’s endorsement of Toomey: Nope
Mitt campaigning in Pennsylvania for Toomey: Check
Sarah campaigning in Pennsylvania for Toomey: ???
Huck campaigning in Pennsylvania for Toomey: Nope
Are you SURE you want to talk about this?
January 29th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Thunder has not only drank the Mitt Romney Kool-Aid, he’s filled up his backyard pool with it and doing laps.;)
January 29th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
$104 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Why so generous?
January 29th, 2010 at 7:55 pm
Sarah and Mike, the point of PACs is not to donate money to other campaigns, that is only a small side issue. The only real reason for PACs are to retain campaign staff on the payroll. Huck knows this and uses it for nepotistic results by employing his daughter on his staff and pays her out of PAC money even when the PAC is running in the red. Surely Huck is making millions off of his Fox show, radio gig, and book deals. He could well afford to form some type of S corporation and make his daughter a share holder thereby paying her from his own income, but no, he abuses his PAC donations to give charity to his daughter.
January 29th, 2010 at 7:58 pm
Mark, my friend
I like you and read every word you say but you obviously did not get the memo:
Huck and Toomey have a minor dispute over a certain Club For Greed…
Oooooh, that’s right.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
S&M Superstars.#27,
If you really want to know what all the money was spent on, go to the FEC site where every dime is accounted for.
May I suggest you cool your jets until you learn a little bit more about PACs and how they operate? I expect to be making some major posts starting in February when all the year-end reports are in. I suggest you hold your snark until then.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:03 pm
S&M Superstars,
You obviously didn’t get the memo that Toomey endorsed McCain and trashed Mitt — quite publicly I might add. Yet here is Mitt letting bygones be bygones.
Huck?
January 29th, 2010 at 8:06 pm
WARNING:
DanL, keep bringing up the candidates families will get youself banned like several have recently. (Aunt Martha, Bicker Knickers and Heath – who was self-banned).
Talk issues and policies not about “daughters and sons”.
Now answer my question-
WHERE did the overhead of about $3MM for Mitt’s PAC go??????????????
Very fishy.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
Sorr, Mark, I didn’t see your last posts.
I’ll wait for Feb. like you said, my friend. No problem.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:12 pm
S&M, unless you are a moderator you have no authority, so go jump off a cliff. Furthermore, Huck has employed his daughter on his campaign staff. The only people who could possibly consider her off limits when she is CAMPAIGNING for Huck would be the Huckitburo.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
DanL:
Strike two.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:32 pm
Lol S&M, you are, without a doubt, the most ridiculous troll this site has seen.
January 29th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
39.
A. Because I don’t despise Huck and Palin like you do?
B. Because I never talk about the candidate’s families like your lunatic friends did over and over and over thus banned for eternity (or until they behave).
C. Or is it because I have a sense of humor about all this which you sorely lack due to your revulsion and loathing of mainly one Mike Huckabee?
That makes you, sir the troll,
Danny L Troll. (which is your new name, starting now)
January 29th, 2010 at 8:58 pm
S&M you are a troll because:
A. You have made thousands of posts since coming here that are completely lacking in substance. You never contribute anything to any discussion here. Most of your posts are one or two line rah rah Huck posts. Almost all the rest of your posts are juvenile one or two line Romney sucks posts.
B. You never engage on issues, only duck and cover or try to deflect with ridiculous arguments like you did in 40.
C. You have no authority to claim who will or won’t be banned here.
D. You change your name more often than Obama breaks campaign promises. Pray tell, how do you plan to hide on Rightosphere? You have to disclose an actual name there when you register. Hopefully we will soon see the end of your stupid posts.
January 29th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Danny L Troll, I predict you will be banned alongside your partners in crime; Martha & Knickers
before ROS is even officially launched.
Unless, of course you become less trolly… then, we can be friends.
January 29th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
A typical DanL post everybody:
DanL Says:
January 29th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Great jobs Tim and Mitt. Keep it up.
January 29th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
43. Which is actually fine with me.
January 29th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
But it’s your 100′s of posts that go like this:
“I will vote for President Obama over that Huckster in a second every time!”
Danny L Troll, oh my my my.
WAKE UP!
January 30th, 2010 at 8:57 am
Yeah….really looking forward to RoS and really really hoping it ends the reign of lunatics and trolls here at R42012. No offense to the honest Romney haters/lovers, but people like flip dixon, and you can fill in the rest, are trolls and shouldn’t be given a forum. Irrational candidate XYZ haters who can’t join any thread without mentioning potential candidate XYZ should not be given a forum to spread their insanity. While I loathe Huckabee and support Romney, surprise not every thread is about either of them. The trolls on both sides of Huckabee, Romney and Palin need to all get a life and get the hell off this website.
January 30th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
46. Mcon, but the $64,000 question is would you vote for The candidate you say that you “loathe” OVER Obama?
Hmmm…?
Anyway, I’m starting to see these as possible running mates in 2012:
A Mike/Mitt ticket
versus
An Obama/Hillary ticket
Buckle your seatbelts!!!!!!!!!!!
January 31st, 2010 at 7:30 am
Yes there should be some control on bloggers who just throw out cheap one line attacks like foul markings on a bathroom wall. I do miss ‘texas conservative’ and ‘martha’ they usually had statistics and data you could research and confirm. I know martha got a little acostic, but she took a lot of crude direct hits because she was clear and persuasive. 47- As I said before if Mike got the nomination I would vote for him. I committed to that last election even when I felt some anger toward him. But let me put myself out on a limb here. Not in an attempt to bash your man but in an attempt to demonstrate how I percieve Romney. If Romney got the Nomination I dont think he would ever choose or be forced to choose mike; Because Romney is a problem solver and has always correlated teams that bring diverse talents and views that add to the deliberation of an economic or organizational challenge. I dont think Romney sees huckabee as the best choice in that context. So if Romney did do such a thing I will be the first to blast him for doing so. Not because I dont like huckabee, but because it would go against “Romney’s” nature and would thus be an act of expediency rather than the carrying out of his larger goal of solving economic woes etc. I know I’ve opened myself up for it so bring it on… (thats not a challenge)
January 31st, 2010 at 4:00 pm
No problem, it’s just an opinion that you srongly believe, Zeek.
However (you knew that was coming)…
You saying “I know martha got a little acostic” is like saying I know Obama’s a little liberal.
She and her pettifogging cohorts of nutcases (mainly knickers) had to be banned, imho.
January 31st, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Btw, Texas Conservative and 100′s of others will come back now that Martha and her like are banned.
January 31st, 2010 at 4:32 pm
I just looked up the proper definitions for “caustic” and saw Martha’s picture. ; )
acerb: harsh or corrosive in tone; “an acerbic tone piercing otherwise flowery prose”; “a barrage of acid comments”; “her acrid remarks make her …
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
January 31st, 2010 at 8:03 pm
49,51 – “caustic” thanks for being gentle…touche
February 1st, 2010 at 3:35 am
Sarah @ Mike:
I’m with the others who don’t come here that often since Martha, Knickers’, Heath were banned,..You’re just a troll who is bent on antagonizing others. It’s interesting that they were banned after you showed up with your many names.
A little sarcasm goes a long way….just give it a break…You’re not that good.