Hoffman losing fundraising race in NY-23
With the usual no-fundraising-is-not-all-that-matters-in-politics caveat, it’s revealing to look at the latest campaign finance disclosures.
First, political newcomer Matt Doheny is mounting a very serious campaign with serious momentum. He convinced GOP leaders in almost all of the district’s counties to back his candidacy. Now he leads incumbent Democrat Bill Owens in cash-on-hand, $691,205 to $568,928 (although Owens led Doheny in money raised for the election cycle by about $180,000).
Second, questions about the viability of Consevative party candidate Doug Hoffman will continue, as he raised just under $83,000 for the period. That put Hoffman on the Washington Post’s list of fundraising losers…
Doug Hoffman: Remember him? Apparently donors don’t either. Hoffman, who became a national story when he drove Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava out of the November 2009 special election riding a surge of national conservative support, isn’t generating that same sort of excitement in his re-run race.
Hoffman has crafted himself a movement conservative, lock-step with the national figures who supported him last year.
With this year’s NY-23 race vying for attention with every other House race in the nation, the biggest question in this campaign remains will Hoffman fade? That would leave Doheny in the opportunistic position of a one-on-one against Owens with a big GOP enrollment advantage behind him.
Tags: election10
Owens nightly prayer has to be for both Doheny and Hoffman to remain in the race. And Hoffman seems determined (stubborn?) enough to run on the Conservative line if he loses a GOP primary.
The fact that stories like this are written is said because they seem to say, maybe accurately, that who is elected is he/she who has the most money to buy the job.
The best campaign finance reform we could ever have would be one that doesn’t allow anyone to spend more money on trying to get the job than they would earn (?) if they actually win the job.
Imagine what the real workplace would be like if it worked the same way as the fantasy workplaces, aka Albany and Washington.
How much above what you would earn in a year to get a job at Burger King or Wal Mart would you be willing to spend?
I guess you might be willing to pay a lot to work at Burger King and Wal Mart if by getting the job you were permitted to steal as much as you want.
Is that what our elected representatives to Washington and Albany are telling us?
Pete, why are you against freedom of speech?
Pete Makes a Great point, I wish each candidate had equal amounts of money, and were judged/elected on the quality of person they are, not by how much money is backing them.
I can Dream can’t I ??
I am not against free speech. I just recall the words of the prophet, Bob Dylan, who sang, “Money don’t talk. It swears.”
Let me make myself a little more clear. I do believe in free speech. I just don’t believe in paying to speak.
It doesn’t cost anything for a candidate to be interviewed by a reporter.
It does cost money for a candidate to become known well enough that a reporter will want to do an interview. Candidate travel around the area they want to represent, it takes money. I think there should be a $200 limit for individuals an no corporate money. Unfortunately the Supreme court disagrees. Besides, an limit for campaigns don’t matter when you have 537’s like MoveOn, Club For Growth and Swiftboaters.
There were over 650 million individual contributions in the 2008 presidential campaign! I think that’s great.
I think over the years I have given maybe $20 total in campaign contributions.
As far as the ads go, I don’t pay much attention and I don’t understand why anyone does.
The fact that some people are swayed by political ads doesn’t say much for their intelligence, which is probably why we get what we get.
When I was in sales, the owner of the agency advised, “Don’t sell the stake. Sell the sizzle.”
I think the mantra for political ads is to sell a pie in the sky while reminding voters the opposition is wrong about everything.
TV, radio and newspapers do appreciate the money but can survive without political ads.
Last point. The fact that the genius on the Supreme Court think companies are human beings and are intitlied to human rights points out how smart they are.
If you don’t like the idea of corporations buying politicians, you can blame our GOP presidents and their five Supreme court justices for overturning limits on corporate campaign financing: Roberts (Bush Jr.) Alito (Bush Jr.), Scalia (Reagan), Kennedy (Reagan) and Thomas (Bush Sr.)
Doheny’s campaign is all about spending his personal fortune that he made on Wallstreet, saving jobs for South Americans, trying to buy the vote in the 23rd district, Doug Hoffman is the one sitting down one-on-one with as many voters as possible trying to get to know them personally, and that’s why Doug is going to win this race. Go Hoffman!!!
Mateo, why are you against freedom of speech?