Peter Savodnik has a very encouraging article in The Hill, the newspaper for and about the U.S. Congress, entitled, Challengers vacuum up campaign money. He writes:
Senate challengers in battleground states raked in bundles of campaign cash in the third quarter of the year, pointing to growing discontent with incumbents and suggesting that next year's races will be as intense as ever.The steady flow of donations came despite Hurricane Katrina, which led many campaigns to cancel fundraisers and suspend direct-mail and Internet solicitations.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: VOID growth in 2006.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://voidnow.org/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/4
Money for challenger campaigns is on the upswing, according to a The Hill article. The link to The Hill article can be found at a new site called Vote Out Incumbents Democracy (VOID). VOID just went online on Oct. 16... Read More
Expand - Collapse Comment
Aaron said at :
2:18 AM, 10 19 2005 | Permalink
I read Tom DeLay also has picked up a million + for his campaign.
Aaron | October 19, 2005 2:18 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
2:25 AM, 10 19 2005 | Permalink
Yes, but 2/3 of those donations came before his indictment. It remains to be seen if his supporters will continue to dole out the cash on an indicted or worse, convicted, politician. My guess is, not! Especially if he is challenged by a respected opponent of the GOP.
David R. Remer | October 19, 2005 2:25 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
d.a.n said at :
10:23 AM, 10 19 2005 | Permalink
If Tom DeLay gets convicted, I hope Bush doesn't later give him a pardon (like Clinton who pardoned Dan Rostenkowski, who even pled guilty).
This pardoning business is a slap in the face to the judge and jury and the tax payers that have to foot the bill for the trial (for nothing).
d.a.n | October 19, 2005 10:23 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
10:47 AM, 10 20 2005 | Permalink
Dan, I couldn't agree more.
David R. Remer | October 20, 2005 10:47 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
steve smith said at :
9:47 AM, 10 21 2005 | Permalink
What becomes of the campaign contribution money (ie. that donated for Delay) in the event that the candidate voluntarilly withdraws or, as in the case of Delay is forced to withdraw for reasons of illegal or inappropriate conduct.
steve smith | October 21, 2005 9:47 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
12:38 PM, 10 21 2005 | Permalink
Steve, I am assuming here, but, my guess is the money technically belongs to the campaign committee, not the candidate and therefore would be used for electing the candidate to replace DeLay.
David R. Remer | October 21, 2005 12:38 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Ron Brown said at :
11:00 AM, 10 26 2005 | Permalink
I'm glad to see that the incumbents are in for a battle.
But is all that money going to third party or independents, or are the two major parties getting it all?
Ron Brown | October 26, 2005 11:00 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
11:05 AM, 10 26 2005 | Permalink
Ron, I'm confused by your question. Are you referring to the money donated to reelect Tom DeLay mentioned above?
David R. Remer | October 26, 2005 11:05 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Ron Brown said at :
1:46 PM, 10 26 2005 | Permalink
No, I'm talking about the money the challengers are recieving.
Do you have any breakdown on what the party affilitions of the challengers?
Ron Brown | October 26, 2005 1:46 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
David R. Remer said at :
10:26 AM, 10 29 2005 | Permalink
Ron, I've not seen any evidence that 3rd parties are picking up increased revenue. I don't recall a breakdown by party affiliation.
David R. Remer | October 29, 2005 10:26 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Ron Brown said at :
11:51 AM, 10 29 2005 | Permalink
To bad, I was hoping that someone other than the 2 main parties was getting more money.
Ron Brown | October 29, 2005 11:51 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
d.a.n said at :
7:06 AM, 10 31 2005 | Permalink
If the third parties and independents grasp and run with the non-incumbent message, they may not need a lot of money. It's in their best interest.
d.a.n | October 31, 2005 7:06 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
d.a.n said at :
7:26 AM, 10 31 2005 | Permalink
Hmmm. Maybe Libby and DeLay will both get pardons? Of course, their innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, that could take years, and still never reveal the truth.
d.a.n | October 31, 2005 7:26 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Ron Brown said at :
10:01 AM, 10 31 2005 | Permalink
You might be right d.a.n. It seems that once canidates start getting big money donations they loose intrest in whats best of the country and look after their big donners.
Ron Brown | October 31, 2005 10:01 AM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
d.a.n said at :
6:47 PM, 11 01 2005 | Permalink
Even if DeLay didn't break any laws, I don't want his kind in government.
He exemplifies "Government for Sale" like no other.
He's being accused of money laundering. That's pretty serious, but what else does it tell you about the government, and election campaign finance?
d.a.n | November 1, 2005 6:47 PM
Reply to this comment
Expand - Collapse Comment
Ron Brown said at :
6:54 PM, 11 01 2005 | Permalink
It tells me it's AFU. Both the government and campaign finance.
BOTH NEED TO BE REFORMED!
Ron Brown | November 1, 2005 6:54 PM
Reply to this comment