Compared to her opponents, Hillary Clinton has spent 3 times as much on her campaign than her rivals. The goal of her campaign is to overwhelm her opponents but as funding surged in the summer, the same revenue intake has not kept pace. She is spending more then she can raise which undermines her longevity of keeping ahead in media and canvassing. According to Robert Shrum, “But it [Hillary's campaign] is premised on one thing: that they can keep up the fund-raising pace.” Despite, the advantage she had in revenue her opponent, Bernie Sanders is quickly gaining ground through online donations. However, despite the surge in Bernie Sanders' funds he has yet to send personal to Nevada, Iowa, or South Carolina. This can antagonize Sanders' bid for the Democratic ticket because President Obama's team had placed people in early states by the time Hillary Clinton had done it in 2008. The Republican candidates have also raised revenue, with Jeb Bush compiling huge sums of donations trailed by Marco Rubio. Yet, both of these hopefuls lack the ability Trump's campaign team possesses through Trump's use of Twitter and other social media. Trump's free use of media has helped him to take the lead in polls and spend more on items like t-shirts than commercials. I think that Hillary needs to continue to push for heavy donations from her supporters to combat the up rise of Bernie Sanders (who has not used commercials in his campaign) and suppress it before he defeats her like President Obama. The Republican candidates need to begin to canvas heavy and need to invest heavier to stop Trump's poll numbers from increasing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us/politics/filings-reveal-hillary-clinton-leads-money-race.html?ref=politics
I don't think Hillary Clinton has to worry about anything for campaign finance. Her last name itself will help her raise revenues if a dire situation comes to hand. Hillary Clinton is also backed by large corporations such as Time Warner Cable, Citigroup and also Goldman Sachs. Many of these companies can donate large sums of cash to Hillary's candidacy and also her SuperPac, which is raising cash in the millions. Unlike Hillary, Bernie Sanders refuses to receive SuperPac donations and the bulk of his campaign finance is from small donations from supporters.
ReplyDeleteI find this situation interesting because Clinton is demonstrating what all Democrats are known for which is spending money loosely. Of course Clinton is being somewhat productive with her money by reaching out to voters. On the whole however, her spending may not all be for smart causes. I think that spending money in this early of a stage in the election takes a lot of guts because there is no guarantee that Clinton will secure the Democratic nomination. Hopefully she won't squander the nation's budget if she becomes president like what she's doing now
ReplyDeleteI think Clinton still is most likely to win in the Democratic primary, despite her current troubles with funding. Although funding is a big part of campaigning, the candidates themselves are also important. With Sanders leaning so far to the left, while Clinton declares herself a "progressive who likes to get things done", Clinton has more appeal to a wider range of voters. Not only does she secure the female vote, her moderate stances on economic issues draw more voters who identify as independents toward her. So, I don't think Clinton has to worry about losing the election in November.
ReplyDelete