Clinton campaign’s money machine dominates Trump and Sanders in latest FEC reports
Source: Washington Post
Hillary Clintons skill and experience in raising money have provided her with a dominant financial lead over her Democratic and Republican rivals, according to the latest Federal Election Commission reports.
Filings for the month of April show that Clinton and her remaining competitor for the Democratic Party nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), raised about the same amount of money, each reporting receipts topping $26 million. But Sanders was spending money at a far greater rate and had just $5.8 million on hand at the end of the month, compared with Clintons reported cash on hand of $30 million.
Meanwhile, the reports laid bare the challenge facing Donald Trump, who is now focused on the general election. Clinton has far outpaced Trump in spending to build a campaign infrastructure and in building financial reserves for the long race to Election Day in November. Each campaign is expected to spend $1 billion or more in their quest to win the White House.
Running as a self-funded candidate not beholden to traditional donors, Trump has so far raised and spent less than many of his Republican opponents and far less than Clinton. All told, Trump and his supporters have raised about $59.4 million so far, compared with Clintons total of nearly $300 million. Most of Trumps money has come from loans he made to the campaign, totaling $43.4 million, including $7.5 million in April alone. Clinton and Sanders have each spent close to $200 million, compared with $56.5 million by Trump.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/21/clinton-campaigns-money-machine-dominates-trump-and-sanders-in-latest-fec-reports/
"But Sanders was spending money at a far greater rate and had just $5.8 million on hand at the end of the month, compared with Clintons reported cash on hand of $30 million."
From The Washington Post, May 21 at 1:50 PM
Sid
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)his opponent.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Before he spends it all.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Does that make sense to anyone?
Sid
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)The Washington Post is a mainstream news site. It is new, today, and it isn't an opinion piece.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)I kid... I kid... Except for the alert part.
Can you believe it?
On Sat May 21, 2016, 08:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Message from a HOST, about LBN articles...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1458923
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Are emails not private on the DU?
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat May 21, 2016, 08:42 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Jury stalking again. Skinner!!!???
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I reluctantly have to say Leave, because e-mails, or DU mail, are not private, if the sender or recipient decides to post them.
I kind of remember something from Skinner about this, from a long time ago.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, they're not, if the person who receives them chooses to share them.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yes. Emails are not private on DU.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nope.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)They know they'll get what they are paying for.
FDR: "I welcome their hatred!".
HRC: "I love their money!".
Nailed it.
Nitram
(22,932 posts)Whatever the polls might say.
askeptic
(478 posts)I mean, I expect her to be better at the mechanics since this is her second attempt, but many of us wonder just why there is some notion that the richest person deserves to win, and that it is the only measure of success. I mean if money makes Hillary such a good candidate, why is it Bernie seems to be favored by almost as many people as favor her? Why ISN'T everyone just jumping in unison behind her? It's just a puzzler...
murielm99
(30,779 posts)This is indeed interesting news, Sid.
If Sanders cannot manage campaign funds, how can he expect to manage the budget of the country?
Thank you for posting this.
cstanleytech
(26,342 posts)no president really manages the budget themselves.
The question is would he be given good sound advice and would he take it? I think both he and Hillary would listen atleast.
Some like George Bush for example wouldnt know sound advice if it stood right in front of him wearing big orange shoes with a green wig and a pink tutu with sparklers shooting out of its ass.
askeptic
(478 posts)Looks to me like he is managing just fine. He knows Hillary has a big delegate lead, and realizes his only chance is to stay in the race each primary. He's not "saving" any for later. That will come naturally if he is able to overcome the odds. I have nothing against Hillary's supporters, and am happy to see our democracy at work. Hillary stayed in until the end in 2008 even though she wasn't doing as well as Bernie is now, so I don't know why all the resentment towards Bernie. With the Republicans we've had running in recent presidential cycles, we're always on the brink of disaster.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Ain't Kleptocracy grand?
Cha
(297,890 posts)Pauldg47
(640 posts)LoveMyCali
(2,015 posts)Spending like a drunken sailor is rarely a good thing.