Is Kerry breaking pledge to defeat Edwards?

[Nazgul35]

Senator Kerry took Howard Dean to task for foregoing matching funds last Fall, offering up his decision to fore go matching funds as self defense. At the time, Kerry called for all Dems to adhere to the $45 million mark, saying at the time:

Today, I also issue a challenge to Governor Dean. Senator Russ Feingold has called on all Democratic candidates who forgo matching funds to pledge that they will not spend more than the limit of $45 million until the nomination is decided. I accept that – and I call on Howard Dean to do the same. To show America that his decision was about beating George Bush and the special interests and not just about grabbing an advantage in the primaries.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2003_1114b.html

Over at dKos, Jerome Armstrong has a digest where he does some quick math that suggests that Kerry, if he hasn't already, is quickly approaching the $45 million standard he himself endorsed and used to pummel Dean with last Fall.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/2/22/201546/548

Quick math would lead one to see that Kerry's spending in 2003 of $27 million added $11.2 million in January, putting him at over $38 million beginning in February.

So, for Kerry to keep his pledge to abide in spending less than $45 Million before the Democratic nominee was chosen, he'd had less than $7 million to spend beginning February 1st, three weeks ago, until... Hey, has Kerry's campaign yet admitted to breaking the pledge? The nominee has not been chosen, but the expenditure math thus far ($11M in Jan, 3 weeks into Feb) leads to the conclusion that Kerry has already spent $7 Million in Feb, and is now over $45 million.

So here is the question: Is Kerry using a double standard?

Now that he is the front runner, has the very rules he wanted to adhere to no longer applicable now that he is in front? Clearly he has a tremendous advantage over Edwards already, but this would allow for a nuclear option in being able to outspend Edwards in the important first two weeks of March....

Also..in a side note, we will not know until after March where funding for this quarters money is coming from...so once the dust settles...we will not know who it was that is helping Kerry outdistance Edwards in cash until April....

Is this another example of Kerry flip-flopping on the issues?

[ProudToBeLiberal]

1. this is damning for kerry.

[DjTj]

5. If we find out he's cheated at the end of March...

...it will already be too late. :shrug:

[girl gone mad]

2. I guess you dodn't get the memo.

We can only say negative things about Ralph Nader today.

[Malva Zebrina]

3. Hope not

but in my heart do not believe that Kerry has the stuff necessary to defeat Bush. He is too entrenched--too cautious and gives the imepression that he is too scared. He better get with it because this is really crucial. It is NOT the time, in order to save this nation from four more years of Bush, to play little good old boy politics.

Not Kerry

You need to commit or get out.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

4. So now Kerry is guilty of something he MIGHT DO IN THE FUTURE?

:eyes:

[ProudToBeLiberal]

6. he might of already have

if he does go over the 45 million cap. Will you call kerry on it?

[DjTj]

7. He MIGHT be guilty of something he MIGHT do in the future...

:evilgrin:

[Nazgul35]

8. Did you read any thing in my post

and the links or just respond?

It is clear that Kerry may have already gone beyond the $45 million he demanded that everyone adhere to....

The future is now...but I guess Kerry gets a pass....

And if I am not mistaken...many candidates who are not in the race now were accused of anything someone could think of to discredot them...all of them in the future...

PS: way to respond to the points raised in the posts.....

[KittyWampus]

12. MAY Have

M-A-Y Have.

[bigtree]

14. Did you read your own posted blog?

There are several explanations given by posters below the article.
I don't have to do the Koz dance here to refute this. There is no independent confirmation that this is so. Edward's campaign would likely lead the charge. When there is then Kerry will respond.

Meanwhile, try reading some of the dissenting posts below the article. This Koz sounds like just another hack outside of the campaign that doesn't know his head from his ass, much less the finances of the Kerry campaign.

[Nazgul35]

19. In terms of reading...

you should note that it is Kos and not Koz....

And the diary is not by him....it is by the author as I stated above in the original post....but thanks for the advice...

PS: I posted it here to get reaction from my fellow DUers, it was being addressed at dKos....and had not been mentioned here....

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. He broke his spending agreement with Weld.

Why change now?

[Nazgul35]

10. So now you're accusing him of things

he's done in the past!!!

<mock outrage...raised fist banging on the table>

:evilgrin:

[bushwakker]

13. Thank Christ he did*

[ProudToBeLiberal]

16. woah are you advocating dishonesty and filp flops?

Wheres the honor in that? I thought promises meant something

[bushwakker]

17. He was outspent by Weld - I advocate winning

[King of New Orleans]

11. The guy screwed up his math

He links to an article from the Buffalo News to back him up.

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040222/1000853.asp

That article says that thru the end of January, Kerryy has spent 30.8 million.

Wonder-blogger has apparently double counted January.

That's a problem with the internet, anyone can post anything.

[bigtree]

15. That's a problem with the internet, anyone can post anything.

You said it!

[Nazgul35]

21. he reported the amount

through Dec., which was $27 million....he added another 11.2 million for January...which is $38 million...

as the article states:

Kerry raised about $4.1 million from contributors and spent $7.1 million, according to his campaign finance report for January, which was released Saturday.

The assumption is that Kerry will spend the $4.1 that he hasn't yet...

The original blogger posted that

Kerry began January having spent about $27 million, leaving him $18 million to spend in the nominating season, to remain under the limit.

so he actually doesn't have a problem with his math...

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nazgul35]

25. ok....how's about this than...

since it is clear from spending five minutes on goggle...

You want an official amount, which the blogger actually underestimates...

here is the report of Kerry finances as of Dec. 30th, 2003...

Total Receipts: $28,209,341
Total Spent: $23,255,627
Cash on Hand: $1,605,428
Debts: $3,811,570
Date of last report: December 31, 2003

From open secrets, look for yourself here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00000245

So...adding the $11.2 million reported by the Buffalo newspaper to the amount as recorded at the end of December....

$28.2 million + $11.2 million = $39.4 million....

I await your response and retraction....don't worry, I won't hold my breath...

PS: And I did that without being ignorant about it too....

[King of New Orleans]

35. Step by Step

In post #21 you quote a blogger who states that at the Kerry began January having spent $27 million. You then clearly post in #25 from your own source, than Kerry has only spent 23.3 million.

In February both the blogger and the Buffalo News clearly state that Kerry raised 4.1 million and spent 7.1 million in January.

That means at the end of January, Kerry had spent 30.8 million while having raised 33 million.

The Buffalo newspaper clearly states this:


http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040222/1000853.asp

The blogger on Kos clearly made a mathemathical error.

Kerry clearly began February 14.2 million below the $45 million promised target.

Please note, that Kerry has only stated how much he will spend on the primaries. Kerry clearly has a big incentive to raise above $45 million if he can, because he has in all probability, a general election to worry about against a well-funded opponent. I personally hope that he can raise $200 million while only spending $45 million on the primaries. Let the other $155 be for the general election.

I do expect that you will eventually admit the original blogger was clearly in error on his calculations.

[Nazgul35]

40. the reason you are getting different results

is that you are failing to take into consideration the $3.8 million debt that the Kerry campaign had at the end of Dec....

$23.3 million + $3.8 million = $27.1 million....yes?

I chose not to ignore the debte...as that is part of the money spent by the campaign...hence the term debt.....

You can continue to deny the amount that the original blogger suggests as long as you are willing to let readers know that you are excluding the debt the campaign has incured...and than provide a reason as to why that should not be added....

I have explained in detail where the calculations I am discussing come from...

But this is just a distraction away from the larger point....which is not undermined by your math calculations for the reasons in the posts above...

So again...we are back to the original point, that Kerry is close to going over the $45 million mark...but I have yet to hear that addressed....

[King of New Orleans]

43. Money spent is money spent

Money raised by Kerry includes and money loaned to his campaign. Any money spent includes any money spent (whether it was loaned to the campaign or whether it was raised).

The absolutely bottom line is that thru the end of January, Kerry has spent 30.8 million, not 38.2 million as the blogger claims. Kerry still has 14.2 million to spend, assuming he can raised that much.

[Nazgul35]

47. I'll keep to my calculations

because the debt will have to be paid...so any cash on had will have to be counted against that ultimate balance book...

Let's be fair about it:

As of Dec....

Total spent (your figure): $23,255,627 + $7,100,000 = $30,355,627

Total debt (my figure): your figure + $3,811,570 = $34,167,197

Total debt (the dKos blogger) my figure + $3 million = $37,167,197

Anyone can use any of these three as starting points. But it is important to understand that this is the amount as of the end of January.

Kerry raised about $4.1 million from contributors and spent $7.1 million, according to his campaign finance report for January, which was released Saturday.

He overspent what he brought in by $3 million....so I guess debt is in fact money spent...

and according to the same article the Kerry campaign had:

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20040222/1000853.asp

Kerry mortgaged his family's Boston home to finance campaign loans. The campaign began February with $2.1 million in the bank and $7.2 million in debts.

So let's do some quick math:

If at the end of Dec. the campaign had:

Debts: $3,811,570

the campaign has increased it's debt by: $3,388,430...

of course that is debt...so it doesn't count....

but adding this to the bloggers amount we get:

$37,167,197 + $3,388,430 = $40,555,627 wooopssss that isn't good, that would mean that he only has $4.5 million spending room...what to do?

I know, we just ignore the debt! I like how that works....deficit spending doesn't matter....hey wait, where have I heard that before...hmmmm

As the article stated above...that's what the Kerry camp started the month with since than we have had a few primaries....of course no money was actually spent i'm sure.....we are probably at $10 million, if Kerry could firgure out how to get more loans...

[DjTj]

18. When I saw the title to this post again, I thought - Woohoo!

...Kerry is breaking his pledge to defeat Edwards! He's no longer going to defeat Edwards! Sounds good to me!

[IndianaGreen]

20. The only thing that is predictable about Kerry is that he will flip-flop

John Forbes Kerry cannot be trusted because he changes his positions on the issue every time the wind changes direction, which is often.

[jansu]

22. Does the "F" in John F. Kerry stand for flip-flop?

If he is the nominee, I will vote for him in November! But, I do hope that he is not! Too many of his votes in the past that I really do not approve of. Besides, the White House said that they would hate to run against him.....have they ever lied about anything else? Why are half of the voting Democrats (and remember it is only half of them), believing them now? I will vote for Dean in the March 2nd primary. Delegates matter!

[Scott Lee]

24. Why would this be different than any other Kerry flip-flopperoo?

Same shit, different day is about it.

[funky_bug]

26. To me, a non-issue

That was back when it was dem on dem. Now that shrub has officially begun attacking Kerry, all gloves, and pledges, are off.

If Kerry has to respond to dems and freepers, then he's gonna need a double dose of money.

Thanks for the post though - I didn't know Kerry needed more money. I'll head on over and make a donation right now.

[IndianaGreen]

27. I won't donate a dime to the Kerry campaign, now or ever!

I donated yesterday to Edwards for the first time ever.

Kerry can mortgage another mansion for all I care!

[funky_bug]

28. To each his own

Why so angry though? Edwards has some pretty pennies his ownself ya know.

[Nazgul35]

29. This was done when

Dean was facing attacks from seven other Dems and the repugs...

So to use that argument now can be seen as kinda weak now by some dems

[funky_bug]

30. I think GWB's war chest

is a lot larger than the other dems you mentioned. So to use that argument is not taking into consideration the ramifications of exactly how much money Kerry is going to need to thwart off the Rove machine.

[Nazgul35]

33. look at my sig line...

before you suggest that I don't know the ramifications...

I've been sending in $20 a month since August for the eventual Dem nominee...and if that is Kerry, he will get $160 bucks from me...and more once I know for sure who the eventual Dem nominee is...

But he is using his cash now to take on Edwards....and risks going over the limit he was so quick to want to impose on others...

This is not the first time Kerry has said one thing and done another...

[funky_bug]

34. Making no suggestions

But when Bush started actively attacking Kerry, the rules changed. That was not supposed to happen before the nomination. As a Clark supporter, I spent thousands on his campaign, knowing full well that if he got the nod, the game was on and I'd have to start recruiting donors so that Clark would be able to go up against the Rove machine.

But the Rove machine has kicked off, and Kerry has no option but to field the ball. If he has to fight off the other dems, as well as the GOP early, then he has every right to spend the money he needs to play on both fields. It's not his fault he's being forced to suit up for the playoffs AND the Super Bowl simultaneously.

[Nazgul35]

41. This was the argument that was offered

by Dean and was rejected by Kerry as opportunism...

At the time Dean was under attack (nasty ones too) from both his own Party and the republicans...

As regards Clark...it could never be "on" because Clark accepted matching funds...and would have been limited to the $45 million ceiling....would your attitude be different if it was Clark instead of Edwards running now?

I don't ask for much, but consistency from our candidates is one of them....

[funky_bug]

49. Consistency...

Was Bush actively attacking Dean at that time?

Bush brought the game on. Kerry has to double his efforts, and yes, his funding, in order to battle both parties, unfortunately.

[sandnsea]

31. Howard spent $30 million before Iowa

So however much Kerry spent to compete with that has nothing to do with Edwards. If you want to point the finger at somebody as not adhering to the spirit of campaign finance, that would be Howard Dean.

[Nazgul35]

32. read your own candidates statement...

he stated that the limit should apply until the Dem nominee was chosen...and unless i've missed something, that hasn't happened yet....


And to compare Kerry's money raised to Deans...well go to the site below:

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00000245

and see which candidates have money from large donars and which from small....you can't take the moral high ground in that argument!

[sandnsea]

36. What was Dean's plan?

How in the world did he plan on staying within the $45 million limit if he spent at least $30 million before a vote was even cast? This is just total bullshit. He had to spend to compete with Dean, it has absolutely nothing to do with John Edwards.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

37. so neccessity overides a promise said?

so how can i ever trust john kerry then.

[King of New Orleans]

38. There's no reason to think

Kerry intends to break his original promise. The original source of this story clearly made a mathematically error.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

39. I was responding to sandsea

who basically said that it's necessary for john kerry to break his promise.

[Nazgul35]

44. the math was not wrong...

see posts #23 and #40 above....

The amount of $27 million at the end of Dec. is correct.

$23.3 million spent + $3.8 million in debt

The article says he raised another $11.something million which brings the amount to around $38-$39 million....

$4.1 million is in the bank, but that was in January..since than we've had a few primaries....

If he spent only the amount he had at the end of January and has raised nothing more...he only has about $7 million to play with....

That is hard to believe since he is running in all Super Tuesday primaries....plus Cali and NY the following week....

To stay below the $45 million mark will be a very difficult feat to say the least...

And the point I made about knowing the full amount and where the money has come from until April doesn't seem to bother anyone except in the first few posts....

Do the ends justify the means? Do we take any amount of cash to win...and what strings will be attached? If in order to beat Bush in Nov. Kerry will have to raise cash from the very groups that are funding Bush...how do we expect policies to change?

It matters folks....it matters!

[King of New Orleans]

46. California and NY

are part of Super Tuesday. Five more states are March 9th. After that there will be less than 20% of delegates left to be selected.

The article orginally posted is mathematically incorrect. It's a cold hard fact that Kerry has spent $30.8 million thru the end of January (not 38.4 million by the blogger quoted above). That leaves him with 14.2 million to spend, if he can raise that much, the vast bulk of it should be spent by March 9th.

[Nazgul35]

48. see post #47 above...

the quotes are from the article....

As long as everyone here understands that your position is that debt accumulated by a campaign should not be counted that is fine....

As the article says, based upon the Kerry campaigns own info, that it has increased its debt from $3.8 million to over $7 million, and that when the campaigns debt is taken into account, the campaign had in fact spent close to $40 million by the beginning of Feb., before any of the Feb. primaries (that includes Wisconsin which wasn't free I am sure)...

The campaign may have already passed the $45 million mark, but we won't know that until after Edwards is gone...

[RandomKoolzip]

42. Go back in history and find ONE president has never flip-flopped

on an issue. You won't find one. Yet there have been some great presidents in there. Hell, try to find ANYONE who has never double-backed on him/herself and get back to me when you find one.

I mean, really, what is this drive to lose I'm seeing on the part of so many DUers today? It's like we'd rather see another 4 years of Bush than ever take the chance that Rush Limbaugh might say BAAAAD things about our candidate or something.

The frontrunner really needs all the money he can raise to beat Bush's 145 million dollar war chest, he's up against HEAVY corporate interests who will do anything in their power to make Bush the next president, and you guys are holding him to this ethical standard that will almost surely lead him to a huge loss.

I just don't get this desire to lose some of us here have. Dean was my candidate; he's not in the race. So now we gotta hitch our wagon to the guy who can beat Bush. And if you think THIS is an issue....Jesus, let's take a look at Bush's books, shall we?

And don't tell me this is about hypocracy and lying. You know it's not.

[arewethereyet]

45. of course, but his pledges are meaningless and everyone knows it

[KittyWampus]

50. Did Kerry Go Over NH Spending Limits? Edwards Did

and Clark managed to beat him anyway.