Clinton Campaign's $16 million fib.

[Zueda]

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926

The Los Angeles Times reports, after scouring Federal Elections Commission (FEC) reports that Clinton’s, uh, creative math, included “$10 million from her Senate campaign account and a $5-million personal loan.”

The Associated Press digs deeper into the numbers (the February filing reports came in yesterday) and notes that most of the $19 million that Clinton did raise in February was either offset by unpaid bills or was “general election” money (what big donors, lobbyists and PACs that have already given the maximum $2,300 to the primary campaign then give to a fund that can only be used if the candidate becomes the nominee...

[TwilightGardener]

1. So a good chunk of it was already hers, just located somewhere

else in her finances--kind of like when I tranfer money from savings into checking?

[barb162]

5. Yeah , some seem not to like facts around here.

[truedelphi]

8. Except that the media played it up like she had suddenly become more popular

Than yellow peeps at Easter.

Not her fault, but a false impression was created none the less.

[krkaufman]

20. chuckle. very timely comment re: peeps. n/t

[truedelphi]

23. They're here - they're there -- they are everywhere!

Whether they peep for Obama or for clinton remains to be seen/or heard.

[Dems Will Win]

18. I debunk this story on a new thread:

The Field misread the LA TImes paragraph.

Check it out: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5193545

AND STOP RECOMMENDING THIS THREAD, IT IS NOT CONFIRMED OR EVEN APPARENTLY TRUE.

And I'm a well known Obama supporter here.

[lapfog_1]

2. rut-roh...

PAC money to be used in the GE (not in primaries)...

so much for the $35M month. I aways thought that was "fishy" after she almost went broke in January.

[jenmito]

4. The media was claiming she has sooo much grass-roots support that "came to her aid" when she

announced she needed help, and that they just weren't aware that she NEEDED any money. Yeah, right. As if her campaign wasn't constantly sending out emails asking for donations...

[krkaufman]

13. Right. Just like the Right Wing "Freedom's Watch" is a grassroots organization

The word is astroturf.

Hillary's big donors ponied-up a bunch more cash, even though they'd already maxed-out for the primaries, so that she could put up some big February numbers. This means, then, that these donors may have already maxed-out for the general election, so Hillary Clinton has a smaller GE donor potential, relative to Obama.

[rinsd]

3. How is that creative math? Her Senate total has always been included as should her loan.

[jenmito]

7. She and her campaign claimed they were raising $1 million a day in Feb.

:eyes:

[Kittycat]

10. Raising... Transfering between books. Same thing, right?

[rinsd]

26. No it doesn't the author fucked up and you bought hook line & sinker

Update and Correction: The story below - based on my misreading of the linked LA Times story - is incorrect: The $10 million from the Clinton US Senate committee came in 2007, and the $5 million loan was in the January, not February, FEC report. The Field regrets the error

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926

[rinsd]

28. We'll know soon enough. The author has admited botching this story

Update and Correction: The story below - based on my misreading of the linked LA Times story - is incorrect: The $10 million from the Clinton US Senate committee came in 2007, and the $5 million loan was in the January, not February, FEC report. The Field regrets the error

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

9. It's creative because...

...she claims to have had a fundraising windfall in february. Money from her senate campaign, and money she lent to herself, are fundamentally not the same thing as donations from third parties. That money says nothing in terms of her fundraising last month.

[rinsd]

25. Actually the only creation was the blogger and their poor reading comprehension

Update and Correction: The story below - based on my misreading of the linked LA Times story - is incorrect: The $10 million from the Clinton US Senate committee came in 2007, and the $5 million loan was in the January, not February, FEC report. The Field regrets the error.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926

[JackORoses]

15. did she raise 35 million in February? No, she already had half of it.

It is fuzzy math when you portray cash on hand as new donations.

Do you never find yourself the slightest bit disappointed in how sleazy your chosen candidate is?
The Truth has no bearing on her campaign, only perceptions.

[Dems Will Win]

22. You are correct, The Field made a mistake.

Oh -- and Gobama!

[krkaufman]

6. More Clinton spin and obfuscation n/t

[sloppyjoe25s]

11. Wow!!! This is Stunning!!

Far out...

I really thought she had raised that money for the primary in Feb! Holy Smokes!

This is a much much much lower number for real primary money for Feb!

WOW - CLINTON IS QUITE A SCAM ARTIST! I WAS FOOLED!

I wish this had come out earlier!!

[BlueIdaho]

12. Classic Clinton...

Say anything do anything behavior. Its a shame to see the truth is one of the casualties of her primary campaign - I used to repsect the Clintons but not any more.

[grantcart]

14. This is actually stunning news

I assumed that they were continuing the campaign because they were making money for their warchest.

Now why in the hell are they continuing??

[TwilightGardener]

17. Big PR stunt. With no truth behind it. Let's see if the media reports it.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. "raised $16 Million Less in February than It Claimed"

why am I not surprised?

[ruggerson]

19. So now is everyone on this thread going to be adult enough to say they were wrong?

or just move on to the next lie?

[grantcart]

24. lol interestingly snarky way to express it. I have already gone on the other

thread thanking them for clearing it up. Being inadvertantly misinformed is not anything anybody has to admit to. Glad it got cleared up.

[BlueIdaho]

30. Yup that's me - wrong on this one- my bad n.t.

[Qutzupalotl]

21. Apparently this was a reporter's error. See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5193545

[high density]

27. FYI this is total bullshit

I can't believe that site hasn't corrected itself yet. Maybe they'll fix it after 24 business hours.

[rinsd]

29. The site has made the correction, the OP has likely passed their editing time

Update and Correction: The story below - based on my misreading of the linked LA Times story - is incorrect: The $10 million from the Clinton US Senate committee came in 2007, and the $5 million loan was in the January, not February, FEC report. The Field regrets the error.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926