Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Who will choose our 2016 nominee? [View all]frazzled
(18,402 posts)14. "Supposing" is mere conjecture
Frankly, Kerry's influence was not all that great a factor, given the intense competition between Obama and Clinton that persisted throughout the very long primary season. A good deal of Obama's success in the primary came from his participation in the caucus system, which Clinton had ignored early on. The rest was a function of the huge number of Obama's donations from small donors. Obama had created a revolutionary new way of fundraising that not only raised a lot from small donors but also engaged them as active volunteers who were out canvassing and phonebanking. Huge numbers of people were giving amounts under $200 ... something John Kerry probably had little to do with What counted most was the internet. Let us not forget:
The phenomenon of donors giving modest amounts more than once was particularly important for Obama. It resulted from his campaign's remarkable success in using social networking and other Internet campaigning tools to engage his supporters repeatedly. More than two hundred thousand of his supporters started off by making small contributions and then came back again, often multiple times, to end up by giving more than $200. These repeat donors also were often among those who formed the core of the Obama campaign's crucially important online and offline activist volunteers.
When you look at money from donors based on their aggregate levels of giving, Obama received 30 percent of his primary campaign funds from donors who gave a cumulative total of $200 or less for the primaries. His $121 million from donors of $200 or less nearly tripled the $42 million Hillary Rodham Clinton raised from similar donors (21 percent of her total primary funds) as well as the $42 million raised by the Republican nominee, John McCain (21 percent of his total funds).
http://www.cfinst.org/press/releases_tags/10-01-08/Revised_and_Updated_2008_Presidential_Statistics.aspx
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
71 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Then get out in the real world and do something other than admonish those that WILL vote
Dragonfli
May 2014
#48
What do YOU think happens it Biden decides to run even with Hillary in?
VanillaRhapsody
May 2014
#43
Not messy at all...unusually UNMESSY in fact.....UNLESS Joe Biden decides to run...
VanillaRhapsody
May 2014
#46
I occasionally see these posts that say 'we don't need a primary' when an incumbent is running
Bluenorthwest
May 2014
#38
and I didn't say we didn't need it....do you know the history of being Vice President
VanillaRhapsody
May 2014
#41
Your problem is that Obama's machine no longer exists. It was a one time thing, successful but...
CK_John
May 2014
#8
Obama will back either Clinton or Biden and that has nothing to do with "corporatism"
stevenleser
May 2014
#19
My idealism died many years ago and has been replaced by reality and sarcasm
Exposethefrauds
May 2014
#24
If you are a compelling candidate, you can raise enough money to compete in the first 2-3 contests
stevenleser
May 2014
#18
President Obama has NEVER chosen or appointed someone from the Progressive Wing of the Party...
bvar22
May 2014
#29
...and there was Hilda Solis, appointed as Labor Srcretary in his frist administration,
bvar22
May 2014
#34
Excellent points, Laelth. My only addition to your post is to ask since we now KNOW that money
sabrina 1
May 2014
#39