David Corn

Mr. David Corn,

You have to remove your "inside the beltway" brain truss - you are comparing the dollars raised as a measuring stick - it is not. If the money is the measure why even have elections? Just take the most wealthy and best money machine (the corporate ATM's) and install them.

Paul and Dennis are both kooks but they will serve as a type of conditioner for the message - neither will ever shine the seat in the WH - THAT is reserved for the status quo corporatists.

Thanks for all of your work.

Captain,

Thanks for commenting. But it's not inside-the-beltway conventional wisdom to look at fundraising numbers in order to see how many supporters a candidate has and how passionate those supporters are. This has nothing to do with the qualifications of the candidates, but it does have something to do with their ability to foster support. BTW, in recent years, the candidate with more money has won his pary's nomination every time--except once. Name that person: Howard Dean. So, alas, money is about as good an indicator of success as any. We'll see what happens this cycle. But I stand by my original point: money raised is a sign of support. And, of course,, conventional candidates tend to win elections because...the unconventional--ahem--rarely happens.

Keep on commenting....

It will little, then who wins each of the two parties' nominations, if pro or anti-Iraq occupation is the major issue. The prospective platforms will be focused on the slight variances of either ending the occupation quickly or much, much more slowly.

The farther left or right the nominees the further the distance to the center-left or center-right position they'll travel between nomination and election.

It'll be more an ocillation than a sea change and the money will still flow to whomever serves the K-street masters.

Best, though to push the pedulum as far as one can, I suppose.

there's another possible scenario for Kucinich and the Dems. While the Democratic candidates may all have stated opoosition to the war, not all have actually overtly said much about leaving Iraq with the exceptions of Kucinich -- get out immediately -- and Richardson -- out in six months. And, of course, there's the fact that some key Dems, while expressing some opposition, have continued to vote with the Republicans on funding for the war. Kucinich is the notable exception here. He's never voted for funding and is the one and only who voted against going into Iraq.

As we were rushing a stroke patient to CT yesterday, we passed by the windows of the CathLab waiting room.

I shouldn't have been, but was nonetheless surprised that the 25 or so family members of patients undergoing the delicate proceedures of cardiac catheterization, CABG and other dramatic and life-extending events were completely engrossed in the latest OJ trial.

The dollar was continuing its downslide, the Dow was in full-bore retreat, the Executive branch of US gummint was facing empeachment debates, but the nation turned its weary eyes to the drama of yet another celebrity's sad self-imposed calamity.

I think we not only succumb to distraction, we don't just sit passively while it is spoon-fed by McMedia...we actively seek it out, embrace its gentle luke-warm wash as a substitute for the comforts we've traded in for upward-mobility.

-T

This was on the local news last night
--------------------
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/08/politics/main3472781.shtml
Paul Returns Donations From Stolen Cards

(CBS) The presidential campaign of Texas Rep. Ron Paul received donations from overseas thieves using stolen credit cards, reports CBS station KTVT in Dallas/Fort Worth.

Investigators at Frost Bank discovered that the stolen cards were being used to make $5 contributions to the Paul campaign, in an apparent attempt to test the cards.

Frost Bank refunded money from nearly 100 customers and canceled all 500 of the credit cards that had been stolen from the bank. The Paul campaign tells CBSNews.com it has refunded to the bank the donations from the stolen cards, which amout to about $3,000.
--------------------
So the dirty money totaled $3,000 dollars if they are being honest. If they are not honest then it may well have something to do with his surprising fundraising numbers.

Like voting for American Idol I think fundraising can be a shell game. The only meaningful numbers come from bundling and corporations and corporate interests.

$5 million in a day is a yawn if we look at the large picture.

That is unless Ron Paul can raise that much much more often.

The handicappers that measure just $$$ are discounting all Americans that do not give money to but will vote for a given candidate.

Beyond the actual dollars raised we have the huge corporations that can massage if not control the content of the media message offered up to the less informed public. More than money itself the media could pull more stings than is fair or right.

Of course there is not much else to go on before the primaries but imagine the effect on the genereal election.

Your causal anlysis of the relative fundraising success of Kucinich and Paul relates to politcal factors like energized constituency and pramatic constituency but what if Kucinich's money people are just plain enept, or his constituency is financially poor as compared to Paul's?

Paul stands in a field of Republicans who are falling over each other to attack the next middle eastern country. He is the only anti-war Republican that conservatives - who consider liberals the enemy - can vote for.

Kucinich shares the anti-war spot - more or less - with Obama and Edwards. Still, I'm not ready to conclude Kucinich's poor fundraising showing is attributable to this factor until other logistical causes could be ruled out.

CORN, GREAT TO SEE YOU IN THE COMMENTS SECTIONS!!!

Neil (aka O'Reilly)

PS. Happy is still a doucheb*g.

I cannot think of another place on the planet - other than inside the beltway - where one has to be willing to indulge a politician with dollars for ones passion to be measureable.

That would seem to allow no voice for the poor, the working poor, the disabled, the elderly and all internal refugees (Katrina) and any other very passionate person that is forced to live payday to payday because no good paying jobs are available.

I imagine that by that measure any politician that really reasonates with the poor and is against the interests of the wealthy will always be destine to be discounted to third or lower tiers.

I see the Paulites as GOPhers that want to pretend the solution to the GOP created mess is . . . The GOP.

Counting dollars as poll number is risky.

Even good poll numbers (from small samples) are a risky guide for conclusions or prediction but I think poll (telephone polls) only exclude those without phone service.

We keep hearing about the low poll numbers for congress but the number reported is for either the whole congress or by party. I would like to see the aggregate numbers for each party by each congressperson. Also the average.

I assume most congresspersons polls higher than the numbers reported for the whole.

Storm surge barriers were closed in the Netherlands and the UK, including the massive Maeslant Barrier which guards the entrance to Rotterdam's port. It was the first time the Maeslant Barrier had been closed since it was built in the 1990s ...

Photos at:

http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,PB64-SUQ9MjYzNDQmbnI9Mw_3_3,00.html

I'll take that as another indication of global warming.

While it is true that the candidate who raises the big $$$ has a major advantage, it is not necessarily a true measure of support. 10 donors of $100.00 each will raise more money than 20 donors of $25.00 each. But the less money donors doubles the votes of the higher donors. It would be interesting to see a complete and unedited list of the amount of donors for each candidate.

http://opensecrets.org/

Has a bunch of info.

DJIA tanks -550 for the week.

Can we call it a crash yet?

Paid a quick visit to open secrets. Thanks for the tip. Definitely worth a visit.

Am I misssing something or is there a lack of passion about any candidate out there, except Ron Paul, by the electorate? Myself, I think they all are yawners. At least with Ron Paul, as was the case with Howard Dean, there was something there to at least raise an eyebrow of interest.

Wow, OpenSecrets is informative. Thanks Capt. It was pretty depressing to see the contribution distribution from my zip code.

$316,600 Giuliani, Rudy
$226,450 Thompson, Fred
$184,625 Romney, Mitt
$153,510 Clinton, Hillary
$131,550 McCain, John
$114,800 Edwards, John
$68,772 Obama, Barack
$57,749 Huckabee, Mike
$43,720 Paul, Ron
$28,350 Richardson, Bill
$7,100 Dodd, Chris
$4,900 Tancredo, Tom
$4,850 Hunter, Duncan
$2,750 Kucinich, Dennis
$1,500 Biden, Joe
$300 Keyes, Alan

I always love to share a good source.

Here is my zip:

$2,048,850 Richardson, Bill
$50,350 Clinton, Hillary
$40,000 Edwards, John
$29,350 Romney, Mitt
$23,050 Giuliani, Rudy
$14,901 Obama, Barack
$11,950 Paul, Ron
$9,550 Thompson, Fred
$8,850 McCain, John
$5,450 Biden, Joe
$3,300 Brownback, Sam
$1,750 Huckabee, Mike
$750 Tancredo, Tom
$600 Dodd, Chris

*****

Bill is a very popular governor.

I'm thinking the numbers are for the whole state - the total for my zip is about $24k not $2m.

This is not that kind of neighborhood.

There is another portion of this post, and that has to do with "the war". The problem is that "the war" is beginning to devolve into many meanings. I strongly believe that the current lack of media coverage, the precipitous decline in American and Iraqi casualties, and the withdrawal of at least one army division from Iraq before Christmas, all mean that Americans are basically going to declare victory in 2008 and come home, leaving some peacekeeping forces. It will be left for the historians to determine the success or failure of the mission. Good and bad things on both sides.

The next President, Republican or Democrat, conservative or progressive, is going to have to deal with Iran and N. Korea - and now possibly/probably Pakistan. (N. Korea's current dismantling of the old nucelar facility at Yongbyon is absolutely laughable as far as nuclear deterrance is concerned.)

One can argue that it is or is not all George Bush's fault, but that will all be irrelevant come January 2009.

Dangerous times.

There is another ticking time bomb out there that no one seems to wish to address. Actually, there are two - Medicare and Social Security. Pick whatever actuarial numbers you wish, but the current underfunding of those two programmes is in the multiple tens of trillions (yes, Martha, trillions) of dollars.

When those facts start sinking in on these baby boomers, the repurcussions will make 9/11 and Islamic terrorism seem like a walk in the park in comparison.

The next generation of Americans will face challenges we never had to imagine.

I wonder what a future America will look like if we end up defaulting on our foreign debt? If the dollar crashes it is not completely out of the question.

Captain,

Actually we are about to default on two debts - debts to outsiders (read "China") and debts to ourselves (read "Medicare" and "Social Security").

And, yet no one from either party wishes to discuss situations that will face every living American in the next fifteen years.

An interesting article, David, as usual, but I wonder if you have overlooked an obvious point.

Ron Paul's brand of right-wing libertarianism appeals to people who have money, or at least some of them. Proposing to abolish the IRS, reduce federal spending on social programmes and the like are the policies of the anti-Roosevelt right.

Though Ron Paul stands outisde the insane militarism, graft and social authoritarianism that are the hallmarks of today's Republican party, his ideology is still one that has a primary appeal to those with money, including prominent figures in business.

His (authoritarian) views on immigration and dubious pronouncements on race in the past I suspect mean that poorer ethnic minorities are not his constituency either.

Kucinich, to the extent anyone has heard of the guy (and how would they, unless they pay really close attention to political news?) has politics aimed at people with very little money and certainly not at business.

I don't have any data for you, but if I were to start looking, that would be my basic premise.

Kucinich does of course have other problems - a rival in the form of Mike Gravel, which Paul does not have. And more viable, if more mainstream, progressive rivals like John Edwards.

2007 now the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Iraq:

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/06/iraq.main/

Iraqi deaths up in October in blow to US 'surge' policy:

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5htwDpmjgK8bn0czFY0cORMDbqWwQ

2007 Deadliest for US in Afghanistan:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i8dGftYb0s4XWdUMRdIVs3vh1CKAD8SQMS0O0

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
ANNOUNCE SOCIAL SECURITY SOLVENT UNTIL 2032

http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/trustees98_press.htm

An excellent site with tons of accurate data on the economy can be found:

http://www.economyincrisis.org/

New problems for future generations: global warming is the most pressing.

Captain,

The year 2032 is the year funds will be totally exhausted in the Social Security fund. Here is what else the Trustees had to say

"They also now estimate that by 2017 the system will not be taking in enough in payroll taxes to pay all benefits promised and will need to tap the special-issue bonds that make up its trust fund. That date was moved up from 2018."

If you actually read the piece:

"Beginning in 2021, it will be necessary to redeem trust fund assets to pay benefits until 2032 when the trust fund reserves will be exhausted and income going into the trust funds will provide money to pay only three-fourths of benefits."

*****

Not totally exhausted in 2032 but still paying in 3/4's of what is paid out.

The Social Security "TRUST FUND" which was nearly depleted in 1982. Not exactly something to worry about while the dollar drops to nothing.

from: http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#n11

"The assets of the larger trust fund (OASI), from which retirement benefits are paid, were nearly depleted in 1982. No beneficiary was shortchanged because the Congress enacted temporary emergency legislation that permitted borrowing from other Federal trust funds and then later enacted legislation to strengthen OASI Trust Fund financing. The borrowed amounts were repaid with interest within 4 years."

Well, if the dollar dropped to nothing we would indeed be in trouble. But have the dollar decline relative to other currencies is actually a good thing, say many economists.

Not that I trust any economists, mind you...

"say many economists."

And many other have a different take.

If the decline is relative to a rise in the quality of life for third world nations I'd be all for it.

As the dollar declines oil goes up and investors are running from the dollar.

The dollar is dropping but in the worst ways possible and at a very bad time for our next generation.

This drop in the dollar is the result of mismanagement of the economy (for many years) so the results are not likely to be desirable. IMHO

Dollar drops, oil rises and the poor and working poor will have to pay $300 to $500 more to cover the cost for heating oil.

Yup.

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/071106_dollar.htm

The End Is Near!—Gisele Bundchen (Pictures Supplied) Dumps Dollar

By Paul Craig Roberts

*****

If we lose the supermodels we have lost the planet.

Oh, no!!

Not the supermodels!!

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/314

The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 314

November 12, 2007
Worst President Ever Edition

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/314

The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 314

Name-calling is highly sophomoric and often counterproductive, especially coming from either right-wing (e.g., Patriots v. Pinheads) or left-wing (e.g., World's Worst Person) fringe publications and media outlets.

i fear an "April Surprise" that will involve some sort of statement of "victory" in Iraq and a symbolic drawdown. I smell a media meme of this sort developing and i despair of the Democratic "Village" being ready for it...

Wouldn't that enable the Republicons to shift the debate once again?

"A person reveals his character by nothing so clearly as the joke he resents. "
~ Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742 - 1799)

from:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#67603

Bush Is Officially The Most Hated US President Ever [VIDEO]

Posted by Cliff Schecter, Brave New Films on November 12, 2007 at 6:11 AM.

This post, written by Cliff Schecter, originally appeared on Brave New Films

An interesting breakdown by Dr. Frank Newport of Gallup. Of those who dissaprove (almost two-thirds of us, or all those with a functioning Central Nervous System) 14% somewhat don't like him while 50% flat out hate his sorry ass.

I worked at two different polling firms for the 1996 and 2000 election cycles, and that last number is simply stunning. I don't remember seeing anyone even close to that intensity of hatred.

Heckuva job Bushie!