« Obama: Hillary Is An "Outstanding" Public Servant, And I'm "Proud" To Have Campaigned Against Her | Home | Quinnipiac: Hillary Up Only Six Points In Pennsylvania »

Obama Campaign Passes One-Million Donor Watershed

The Obama campaign achieved a new milestone this morning, officially claiming their one-millionth donor:

Bear in mind that this isn't about having one-million donations, but rather one-million people who have donated to the Obama campaign.


47 Comments

| Leave a comment

Hey, good news! Next stop - 2 million donors.

cue Colbert's falling balloons and "I DID IT!" celebration!

If Obama agrees with Sen. McCain on spending limits by their "campaigns" could the DNC then campaign on each members behalf, and/or spend money that had already been raised?

I understand he'd be going back on his word if he pulls out of public financing, but I, for one, would understand completely.

user-pic

Any word on what the millionth donor won? If it was a Prius, I'm gonna be bummed.

This is truly amazing. I have to admit that I am one of the 1,000,000 donors. Wow. It appears that the harsher Hillary attacks Obama the more new donors he gets.

I think this campaign is movement which I am glad to be a part. Even Rove is yet to have answer for it.

Why should Barack accept public funding when McCain has already abused his pledge to abide by the Public Funding limits for the primary? He cannot be trusted and Obama will disfranchise a million of us who want to have a voice in his campaign.

Oh my heavens, he really is God!

Yes, we can. Yes, we did. Yes, we will.

John McCain will never know what hit him.

user-pic

Chino,

The only reason you should be bummed is if you're the One Millionth Donor. After all, as everyone knows by now, we all drive Priuses already. Who needs two?

Now if it's a Prius with a latte' in it...

user-pic

I do. Too many trust fund babies in the house now to get by with just one.

Hurray! I'm one in a million!!!

Anyone else find Hillary's claim of averaging $1 million in donations A DAY online to be completely impossible to believe?

Where is idiotic???

Obama getting one million donations is obviously EXCELLENT NEWS!! for HILLARY!!!

user-pic

I hope that idiotic is the first person to chime in on the article coming next week: "Hillary Bows Out of Democratic Race."

My view of the public funding pledge:

Obama simply needs to say:

"Would the American people rather me take taxpayer money to run for president? Or, would they rather I use the money from my individual supporters. I will pledge not to take money from Washington lobbyists, and I wonder if my opponent will make the same pledge."


Any word if they are going to make that 1 millionth donor public? that person shouldn't be deprived of their history making moment

Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic makes a good case about the public financing question:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/heres_your_public_financing_mc.php

Yes, hyperRevue, I did not believe her claim of $1,000,000 a day in donations, but I also thought she sounded like a fringe candidate when she gave her web address. There was something desperate and amateurish about it. Ready on Day One? She sounds like she's losing it on Debate 20.

I totally agree. Plugging your Web site and asking for donations during a debate is pure amateur hour. It's a debate, not free advertising.

and he didn't even mention www.barackobama.com during the debate.

I just read Princton historian and Clinton sycophant Sean Wilentz' article in the New Republic accusing the Obama campaign of race baiting to make Clinton look bad. Now, he will have to write another one accusing Obamaites of donating so much money to make Clinton look bad...

When do you think they'll announce how much money they've been raising? I think they'll want it out to further convince superdelegates that the race is really over.

Obama counts as a doner anyone buying a t-shirt or a bumper sticker, that make it look like he has so many doners.

Is that not donating to the campaign?

Since they are required to report income from merchandise as donations anyways, it is fair enough for them to claim it as such in public. Anyway, someone who's willing to pay money to wear an Obama t-shirt, button or bumper sticker surely is committed enough to the campaign to deserve to be included as one of his activists, no?

hyperrevue: You may call it donating I call it buying a t-shirt.

But doesn't a portion of that money go to the campaign?

You may call it purchasing, but the law calls it a donation.

It is my understanding that Senator Obama said that he would CONSIDER public funding. Both he and his staff are too smart to set up this outreach to millions of supporters for fundraising and then preclude themselves from utilizing it...This is a smart team and I hope they keep breaking fundraising records and setting ethical standards for the campaigns of the future.

Not true! HERALDSQUARE...we are talking about folks who get online and give bucks to the campaign and they are not purchasing a product, but helping an ethical and honorable candidate win the Democratic Party's nomination!

When I go in Macys and buy a shirt unless I'm trying to fool someone I call it a purchase not a donation

That analogy doesn't make any sense.

A more accurate one would be, I dunno, Girl Scouts. They're selling cookies to raise money for whatever it is Girl Scouts do. You're buying cookies, yes, but you're also donating to a cause at the same time.

Under federal election rules, any campaign that sells merchandise, must list the money received as campaign contributions, and that amount goes under the overall cap of $2300 per person (note: you can give $2300 max for the Primary AS WELL AS $2300 for the general election, so really a total of $4600 dollars max.)

The Obama campaign explicity states this when you go to their merchandise page of their web site.

So yes, it is, and it does count as campaign contributions to his campaign, just as it does for McCain, and for Clinton.

Or, yeah, what he/she said.

Do a person normally pay $25 for a t-shirt? If no then at least a portion is a contribution, therefore anyone who does must be a contributor.

My point is that if you are putting out numbers and not trying to fool people(as to the#of doners) disclose how many are retail sales.If the inflated numbers weren't so important then you wouldn't read and hear how many doners there are it is to give the impression of so many money doners.

So, when Hillary said how much she'd raised on the web in Feb., she should have subtracted store sales? Because I can guarantee you she did not. And that's not dishonest. It's, in fact, the law.

With a million contributors, the Obama campaign can be financed well through the nomination. He can campaign nationwide spending millions of dollars to make certain all of his delegates remain committed to him. I am certain that McCain will want to do the same. Will McCain be able to raise as much money during this primary phase? I doubt it.
If Obama decides to take taxpayer money for the general election, his list of a million contributors can be used for "party building." If McCain takes public financing his list of 100,000 contributors can be used for GOP party building.

Obama is of the people, by the people and for the people, which is why I joined several friends yesterday and made a contribution. I worked on the Clinton/Gore Campaign in 1992, voted for Bill Clinton twice but since that time have learned to stop drinking the kool-aid, now respect that history does not lie. Hillary & Bill=Bonnie & Clyde. They profess to be middle class warriors but their are crooks and liars, power hungry fascists, who are for sale to the highest bidder. You see in America, if you can be bought and sold yet appear to be and perceived by the middle class as being one of them, then you have the greatest of power and influence. Obama's string of victories all across America are convincing in that the coalition is broadening and he has beaten Clinton by 2-1 and double digit margins in many states. Hillary has had few victories of that magnitude. Furthermore, in her "home state" of NY, Citizens Union has called for an investigation into potential VOTE FRAUD IN NY which may have given Hillary her margins in 82 districts. Some believe that Hillary would have lost Brooklyn & Harlem but for the acts of party machine people who favor Hillary.

I think you may be right! (only kidding) But, I first met Obama when he was stumping for Senator in 2004. I live in downstate Illinois and had only heard of him a few days earlier! I had already picked a different candidate to vote for in the primary. My husband and I only turned out for his appearance as dutiful Democrats.

Out in the cornfield behind a little stand set up for him, he spoke very knowledgably and convincingly about the problems facing farmers. He was up on the details of their problems and I was impressed in spite of not understanding those particular issues. (attending his subsequent appearances in downstate Illinois, I have since discovered that he has studied and can address any issue anyone brings up about anything)

Anyhoo, I had the thunderbolt feeling that I was looking at the first black president of the United States! I decided that it would be a really great thing to be able to say I had been kissed by he president, especially the first black president.

When I met him, I said, "Barack, I think a really smart politician would kiss the old ladies instead of babies!" He flashed that wonderful smile and gave me a kiss on the cheek.

I resent the claim that I am a cult follower. At one stage in this campaign, I became somewhat disenchanted after some hawkish sounding comments.
But, I have listened to all the debates and have read his positions and most recently read a very good comparison of his and Hillary's legislative successes on Daily Kos (he won).

I don't think he is God but I have, indeed, been convinced that he is real and that I can put my trust in him as the best Democratic candidate we could possibly have.

I am proud to be one of his million plus contributors.

You're being deliberately obtuse and it's not serving any sort of point you're attempting to make.

When you purchase from the Obama store, BY LAW it is qualified as a contribution. No matter what you buy, there is a 'profit' figured into the price -- whatever extra they tack on is a direct monetary contribution to the campaign. You are not simply paying cost for a shirt or bumpersticker, you are paying cost PLUS what the store adds on, PLUS given the option of 'rounding up' your total as a straight donation.

Even if the 'profit' is only 50 cents, that 50 cents constitutes a contribution. Obama does not discriminate against small donations.

Even if all official merchendice was sold AT COST, which it IS NOT, you're coming off as stupid by suggesting that people who would wear Obama's name on their clothing would balk at throwing him a fiver.

You have no point, and your arguing is senseless. If you feel Obama is trying to 'fool people', my only suggestion is to peruse the past FEC filings by the campaign and/or wait for February's totals to be posted in a couple of weeks.

This was in response to roncraw above.

Yeah, this whole "Of the people, by the people, for the people" thing is kinda freaky, isn't it?

I like it.

Obama counts as a doner anyone buying a t-shirt or a bumper sticker, that make it look like he has so many doners.

Posted by roncraw

-----------

One problem. He is completely out of campaign schwag. It's been all personal donations since January. I ordered a yard sign in December. Still don't have it.

Well, then the truth is obvious:

OBAMA STEALS FROM SUPPORTERS!! Disgruntled supporter says, "I ordered a yard sign in December. Still don't have it." Supporter gives incredulous stare when asked about pursuing a refund.

Story developing...

"Here's your public financing, McCain."

Oh, man, that's awesome.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/heres_your_public_financing_mc.php

hyperrevue said: "Anyone else find Hillary's claim of averaging $1 million in donations A DAY online to be completely impossible to believe?"

Absolutely! From the statistics I read, she is not getting anywhere near as much money from her "supporters" as Obama is. I am disabled and I have donated to his campaign. His donations on average are $109.

I think the striking thing for me in this race is the way that the Clinton Campaign as virtually thrown money away! I saw the reports where she sunk tons of money for pizza and food at Caucuses and snow shovels in Iowa to shovel the path. LOL It DIDN'T snow! Is that really the type of person that we want as our president? If she is unable to handle her campaign funds and has to dip into her own pocket, how in the world can she be responsible with the economy of the country??!!

Another issue I have noted while watching the debates and reading everything I can get my hands on is even more disturbing.

She is UNSTABLE! She can't keep her cool under pressure, she dodges and ducks questions she doesn't like unless backed to the wall, she can't pronounce the name of the successor of Putin, (I'm sorry, however "whatever" doesn't quite do the job)she plays the victim card way too much and she is a loose cannon! Is she really who we want to send to foreign nations to represent us?She has been inappropriate and made what appeared to be stupid put downs and jokes that only made her look like a fool. I'm thinking that she needs psychiatric help. She is like a raving lunatic blindly striking out without any consistency and it just shows her absolute desperation.

In the debate before this one she even aligned herself with Bush! After slamming him for 45 minutes, she made the statement "Even President Bush agrees" I thought that she cut her own throat with that one, however I haven't seen anyone mention it anywhere.

It is unfortunate that she has made a mockery of her husband's presidency by her actions. He is no better with his idiotic assertions as well. There is a reason that he is being hidden in small communities that are pro-Hillary. He has damaged her campaign and it is obvious that no matter how much she insists that she can control him, that she can't!

Bill has placed himself basically as a candidate! He says he will be there and help her. We are not looking for him to be president again. As it was, she was more of a VP than Gore was! She had the larger office and was responsible for jobs that is just not appropriate for a First Lady to be involved in.

Her message that she wants to go back in time to her husband's presidency is ludicrous. As we have learned, (I hope) going back isn't going to change things. The country and world has changed, our next president has to be ready to move forward, not backwards.

There were two points in the debate that struck me. When she was confronted with her own quotes by Russert, she looked like she wanted to climb under the table. Deer in headlights time! The other was after fighting the first commercial break vigorously, when they came back she wasn't there! OMG! How unprofessional and innappropriate. Everyone was sitting and ready and her chair was empty! My husband and I first thought was: OMG, she has taken her toys and gone home! Yet again a moment that no one seemed to notice.

I resent being called a cult follower because I support Obama. That is just another way that hysterical Hillary is desperately trying to put down Obama. What she doesn't realize, is that she is insulting not only his followers and supporters, but also hers. I've spoken with some of her former supporters and that is one of many reasones that they have jumped ship.

Its over. The best thing she can do for the Party is step down when she loses all the states in the March 4th Primary. If she drags it out until the convention, it will undermine Obama's ability to campaign during that time against McCain. When she loses, I would hope that for the good of the party and the country she will gracefully bow out. It has been apparent that having Bill calling in favors to Super Delegates isn't working as they are slowly but surely switching sides.

I hate to see if the Super Delegates go against the will of the people. Although their positions were not designed to vote for the people, in this hot contest; if they don't, there just may be riots in the street. What happens then? Most of our military is overseas, no National Guard to step in.

Go Obama!

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address