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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(114,904 posts)
Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:24 AM Feb 2016

How many SuperPacs does Hillary have? A lot.

We’re going to dive into the web of financing for all of the presidential candidates, but as we have looked into several Republican candidates already — like Ted Cruz’s plethora of super PACs and Right to Rise’s pro-Jeb Bush advertising — we’re going to start this exercise over on the Democratic Party side with Hillary Clinton.1

We'll be delving even deeper into the Clinton money network soon, so keep your eyes peeled for part two. But for now, let’s get started!

Players you should know

To start with, here are the names you need to know and how they fit under our current campaign finance system.2

Ready for Hillary PAC (hybrid super PAC)
Ready PAC (hybrid super PAC, formerly Ready for Hillary)
Hillary for America (candidate PAC)
Priorities USA Action (super PAC)
Correct the Record (super PAC)
American Bridge 21st Century (super PAC)
American Bridge 21st Century Foundation (501(c)(4))
American Independent Institute (501(c)(4))
Media Matters (501(c)(3))
The Bonner Group
Now that you know who is involved, here’s the story we know right now of the money backing Hillary. It's rather lengthy so in this post we'll cover Ready for Hillary, Ready PAC, and Priorities USA Action. We'll be looking at the rest later in the week.

Ready for Hillary

First of all, it’s important to point out that the Hillary Clinton political fundraising machine started a full two years before she declared she was running for president. (At least, the one actually associated with her name did.)

On Jan. 25, 2013, Ready for Hillary formally organized by filing paperwork with the FEC. Clinton was directly involved with the super PAC at that point — you may remember the “Ready for Hillary” bus? Clinton was promoting her new book “Hard Choices” at that time (much like Ben Carson is promoting his book "Gifted Hands" now) and doing speaking events around the country.



11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies


(20,709 posts)
1. And yet in the primary, Bernie has gotten more SuperPAC support than Hillary.
Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:26 AM
Feb 2016

Hillary's SuperPACs have their guns aimed at the GOP, as they should be.


(13,039 posts)
7. Hit Peice By NYT - False Equivalency - That Is Not A Bernie SuperPac - That Is A Union SuperPac
Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:32 AM
Feb 2016

Stop Spreading Myths.



(114,904 posts)
8. It's a lie based on a technicality. But you know that
Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:35 AM
Feb 2016

fJan. 29 2016, 8:27 a.m.
Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images
The New York Times caused a stir by publishing a classic man-bites-dog style campaign finance story in its Friday editions titled “Bernie Sanders Is Top Beneficiary of Outside Money.” The article charges that despite his fiery campaign rhetoric against Super PACs and big money in politics, Sanders has gained much more from Super PAC spending than his Democratic opponents.

“In fact,” the Times reports, “more super PAC money has been spent so far in express support of Mr. Sanders than for either of his Democratic rivals, including Hillary Clinton, according to Federal Election Commission records.”

While more money has indeed been spent on a certain type of campaign spending in support of Sanders, the article leaves the wrong impression by suggesting that pro-Sanders Super PACs have outpaced outside groups supporting Hillary Clinton. If that sounds confusing, that’s because the Times article hinges on a technicality in campaign finance law.

When total Super PAC spending is measured, Clinton groups are leading the way.

The newspaper calculated totals using only “independent expenditures” spent by Super PACs. If the Times had taken into account all pro-Clinton Super PAC campaign spending from this cycle, outside money spent in support of Clinton is more than twice the amount spent in support of Sanders.



(20,709 posts)
11. No, it's the plain truth. It's laughable that you think that the Intercept is a trusted source to
Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:41 AM
Feb 2016

comment on Sanders and Clinton.

The reality is that the differential is even more heavily tilted in Sanders' favor if you also include all the right-wing SuperPAC money running ads on his behalf. The NYT article counted "express support", which is also fine with me. The intercept wants to count some additional spending on Hillary's behalf, but ignore the additional spending on Bernie's behalf.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»How many SuperPacs does H...