Prediction: Romney campaign will face cash flow problems

[grantcart]

Not the Super Pacs (although they may not be getting any more either) but the official Romney campaign.

First thing is Romney has a very small base of contributors and the highest percentage of maxed out contributors.

Second thing is that with debacle after debacle event only the most diehard contributors will stay, most will go to Senate campaigns.

Third Romney never really engendered diehard contributors but more fair weather friends, and the sky is very cloudy.

[thelordofhell]

1. Shitt Onmey is already facing cash flow problems

He didn't raise more money than President Obama last month, and it's only getting worse. He's also pulling his campaigns out of some states. The republican party is counting solely on Citizen's United money.

[AndyTiedye]

2. With Billions Pouring In from SuperPacs, What Else Does Rmoney Need?

Adelson and the Koch brothers can easily match the entire Democratic fundraising effort, just by writing a couple of checks.

It is absurd to talk about Rmoney running out of money.

[freshwest]

5. They can claim they're simply pushing a philosophy. That's what they've always done.

[grantcart]

6. There are however a significant number of expenses, staff, transport, polling, etc that has to be

paid by the campaign.

It will look pretty funny if in the end the campaign doesn't have any money for ads and the only ads are from the super pacs.

[freshwest]

7. I don't mean to say they'll have direct involvement. They just push the memes. It's bigger than R/R.

Has been going on before and won't stop after this elections. In total contributions, despite the August financial bump, I think Romney is ahead. I read here on DU where ALEC just dumped almost a million dollars into Tommy Thompson's campaign against Tammy Balwin. We don't know if the $400 million from the Koches has given to Romney has even been used. There are so many conspiracy groups (patriot, etc.) that are not getting donations, they are self-funding. And we can't discount the value of media not being paid by SuperPACs or the GOP, instead their money is coming from other forces. This is what Obama can't get, no matter how good the case he makes. I still see it as a uphill battle on our side.

[AlinPA]

11. Adelson or the Kochs could (maybe they already have done so) give Romney a billion dollars and

not a damn thing would be done about it. Those things are not enforced.

[AlinPA]

9. It is said to be illegal, but they have been coordinating all along. A few billion is a drop in the

bucket for those billionaires. They can't quit now.

[CreekDog]

17. Right, they can't coordinate, though that's actually good news for Romney

because if they coordinated with his stupidass advisors, he'd lose even harder.

[grantcart]

4. As I made clear in the OP not the super pacs but the campaign.

There is a substantial part of the campaign activity that has to be done by the official campaign and cannot be absorbed by the Super Pacs.

The super pacs will probably be awash in money but it is quite likely that the official campaign organization will end up strapped for cash and doing the things that only they have to do.

[AlinPA]

10. But the SuperPACs are coordinating with the Romney campaign, and they are one and the same now.

[grantcart]

14. they are coordinating on ads but the the campaign infrastructure has to be paid by the campaign

Staff, polling, chartering jets, all has to be paid by the campaign and not by superpacs.

[AlinPA]

20. That's what the rules are, but who will enforce them at this late stage? The election will be done

before anything is done about it.

[grantcart]

21. while campaigns have, obviously, coordinated campaign buys they do it

Because it can be done verbally with no written proof simply by having a meeting or throw away phones.

Illegally paying for campaign expenses is not a first ammendment issue its a felony, just ask John Edwards.

No camaign manager or accountant is going to openly engage in that kind of action.

Campaign expenses are published at the end of the month and if a candidate was flying in charter jets (one example) but not paying for it you would have immediate evidence for an FBI investigation, something no campaign is going to risk.

[BlueStreak]

26. "Billions" is bogus

All the articles that talked about numbers that large used the words "pledged" and "promised" . It wasn't ever cash in hand. And those billionaires are going to stop putting their money into that sinkhole.

[calimary]

12. I think you may have a point. Hell, one of 'em's a frickin OVERSEAS CASINO OWNER. He

understands gambling! With this much money riding on it, you better believe they are SOLELY and EXCLUSIVELY interested in getting their money's worth. These people don't like to part with their money - ANYWAY. I mean, look at how they're all hoarding these obscenely huge profits and avoiding opportunities to create jobs like their press agents in the GOP all crow repeatedly, and hiding it in the Cayman Islands and Swiss bank accounts. It's not just wrongney doing it! All the corporations-are-people entities as well as individual adelman and koch brother-types do it, too. Which in my opinion is just freakin' WRONG and beneath the self-respecting patriots they all say they are.

They don't want to bet a bundle on a loser. Not just the loss of the money, but the loss of prestige in calling this one so badly and hitching their wagon to an anvil. They all consider their moves in public relations terms - as in "how is this gonna look," or "how is this gonna make us look?" Just consider how the phrases "spectacular failure," "end up looking so very bad," "rash and shameful," "outrageous, irresponsible," and "not ready for prime time" that I've seen in some media reports today are gonna play in the boardroom, when you've attached your name or your corporate identity to it. I'd be starting to wish I had some of my money back with shit like this happening. Think of that carpet-bombing of bad publicity they've had to slog through all day long slog. Doesn't look good and certainly isn't something you can boast about at the country club this weekend.

They'll be sending less money to wrongney and more to the down-ticket races as time goes on, if this trend doesn't reverse immediately. Only problem is - if the top of the ticket is demoralizing the base, then that combined with the ongoing bad publicity and ham-handed blunders the campaign has consistently kept making from early-on, plus the polls that are increasingly and in some cases consistently disappointing - if the base doesn't turn out because wrongney has turned them off, many of them won't be at the polls to vote in the down-ticket races either.

Let's hope!!! There may come a point where the momentum's starting to build - going downward - to the point where its irreversible. You do NOT want to get loser-stench on you. Even the faintest whiff of loser-stench makes a lot of partisans want to run for the hills.

I read somewhere when this was all getting started awhile ago - about wrongney's support being five miles wide and an inch deep. Kinda hard to prevent the lake from evaporating with parameters like that. In one part of West L.A. there's a long grassy median that extends between either side of a broad boulevard. That median is lined with these large handsome coral trees that have made the neighborhood somewhat famous. But while they look solid and sturdy, they're really kinda flimsy because of their extremely shallow root system. So what they're basically good at is looking beautiful and falling over. Makes me think of mitt wrongney.

[Cybercat]

13. You're getting ahead of yourself.

Democrats shouldn't get ahead of themselves. We need to fight this to the bitter end until election night. Too much wishful thinking going on here. There's no evidence that Mittins' fund raising has dried up. Obama only out raised him by 2 million in August, and the Republican super-PACs far out number the Democrats'.

[calimary]

15. Welcome to DU, cybercat! And you are absolutely correct. DO NOT GET COMPLACENT!!!

Just watching some of the dynamics, here, though. And I do happen to be a big believer in the psychology of loser stench and its effects on a candidate or campaign.

That said, I'm also a big believer in what Mad-Eye Moody said to Harry Potter many times - "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!!!" We DO INDEED have to continue working for Obama and the Dems as though our lives depended on it. For many, it's the literal truth if the neocons get back in power and sweet-talk wrongney into leading our country into another war. Certainly for women of childbearing age, that's also true already.

Anyway - we're glad to have you with us and we need you!

'Cause as you correctly pointed out - this thing isn't won yet.






Now get to work.

[grantcart]

16. Welcome to DU

DU is all about getting ahead of ourselves.

You will find that a lot of the time we are ahead of others as well.

Here's an example; http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021228695

Nothing in the OP is being said about not fighting, indeed this is the time to double down and take back the House.

Again its not about the Super Pacs but about the official Romney campaign and 3 known variables

1) Romney has a smaller base of supporters

2) His supporters include a high percentage of maxed out contributors


"These fundraising numbers are showing some very positive traction," said R. Donahue Peebles, a real estate developer and member of Obama's national finance team.

He said Romney's numbers will start coming back down to earth now that many of his big-money donors have maxed out their contributions. Obama has a deeper well of smaller-money donors, who can give more, Peebles said.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-09-10/obama-romney-august-fundraising/57738196/1

3) Romney's dive in the polls are going to tempt a lot of donors to give to other, more competitive races.

Its just a prediction, we will have to wait and see.

[davidpdx]

18. I think if you are right then watch for Romney's September fundraising numbers

to dip below $100 million or possibly lower.

[quaker bill]

19. Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

The moment it becomes clear that Rmoney is a loser, (and if it hasn't now it never will) the money will bail to other races. A trickle will continue to flow in his direction because a real and complete bailout on Rmoney will serve to discredit down ticket races. A real problem is that it is most likely too late for $ to have much effect down ticket. Most of the ad space is spoken for at this point, and only if Rmoney ads come down will slots clear for the smaller players.

They went all in for Rmoney, placed their bets, and it appears they have lost.

[Xyzse]

22. Maybe

However, I think their strategy is to let Super PACs do their talking.

I mean, from the way Mitt is bungling through the proccess right now any way it might be best for him to just lay low and let the Super PACs do the campaigning.

Which is what they may just do any way.

[thevoiceofreason]

24. Super PAC money is fine for advertising

But it sucks at GOTV efforts. And that is where elections are won and lost.

[AlinPA]

25. A billion dollars from Adelson/Kochs could buy a lot of door-knockers, mailers, or poll workers.

A lot.

[Xyzse]

27. You're probably right...

I just think that they can't do any worse than what Romney is doing to himself to begin with.

[AndyTiedye]

30. Repigs Don't do "Get Out the Vote" They do "Keep Out the Vote"

and PAC money is just fine for that.

[AndyTiedye]

35. The SuperPACs Do GOTV Too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12523727#post2

[thevoiceofreason]

23. Spot on once again my friend!

Federal campaign committee money is needed both at the campaign level and the state level in order to allow coordination (ticket pushing).

For example, if there is not enough federal campaign money raised by a local or state party, it cannot (at least here in Texas) coordinate with federal candidates - so for the R's that might mean that state/local mailers that cannot mention Romney, Cruz, and whatever idiot R congressman you might have (for far too many of us).

For the Romney campaign, it is a blow to coordinated get out the vote efforts and staffing, primarily.

[former9thward]

28. Neither campaign will have cash flow problems.

Both campaigns are raising an average of 100 million a month, give or take, and that is plenty to take them to November. There are only so many ads you can buy no matter how much money you have.

[grantcart]

29. Romney's money has come from a small base that is consists of a large percentage of

people who are approaching maximum contributions.

For Romney to continue to get $ 100 million he would have to bring in tens of thousands of new contributors, which is unlikely.

Of course those with deep pockets can give to the super Pacs but this OP was about the campaign accounts only.

[AndyTiedye]

31. Ignoring the Elephant in the Living Room

this OP was about the campaign accounts only.

[grantcart]

34. You may not be aware that SuperPacs impact ad buys but that campaigns have huge

expenses besides ad buys that Super Pacs cannot pay for.

Staff expenses, transportation, consultants, polling, transportation including the very expensive chartering of jets.

Yes the Super Pacs could continue to buy ads but the official campaign and all of the expensive overhead could grind down in a hurry without the campaign getting its own financing.

The OP quite clearly stated that SuperPacs were the elephant in the room but that most people are so focused on that particular part of the equation that they don't see that the official campaign requires its own cash flow that cannot be intermingled with the super pacs and is quite transparent and enforced by real and strict criminal penalties.

[AndyTiedye]

32. They Can Always Shake Down Their Employees for Donations

"Bundling", they call it.

[grantcart]

33. no that's not what bundling is and coercing an employee is a federal crime.

[AndyTiedye]

36. They Do It Anyway

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014262598