What it means that Edwards took public financing.

[cali]

The nominee will almost certainly be chosen on Super Tuesday, with over 20 states participating on that day. And that includes, NY, CA, NJ, IL. If Edwards is chosen, he will be limited to spending $50 million dollars from the beginning of his campaign until after the dem Convention at the end of August. As of Sept 30, he had spent $17,932,103. One can safely assume that he's spent at least $12,000,000 since then. That would leave him with only $21,000,000 to spend for campaign expenses and advertising from now until the end of August. And it's not only that he's limited by dollar amount, he's also limited by the rules dictating how much he can spend in each state. That presents problems for him now against Obama and Clinton, but if he gets the nomination, it presents far bigger problems for him against the repukes.

In 2004, bush spent over $250 million in the primary season. Kerry spent approximately $20 million less. If JE is the nominee, expect to see him outspent by about a factor of 10. But what about 527s? Well, 527s can do issue ads but they can't do candidate ads and they can't tell you to vote for or against anyone. They can't coordinate with the campaign either. And the repukes will have just as many 527s pouring money in as the dems will.

How will JE be able to prevent the repukes from framing him without the resources to fight back? There will be nearly 6 months for them to savage Edwards- does anyone doubt that they'll take the opportunity.

Money should be stripped out of the process, but this year it's bigger and more obscene than ever. It's naive not to realize the handicap that public financing imposes on the Edwards campaign.

[Beaverhausen]

1. How many people will pay any attention until September?

We here at DU are obviously more politically aware, but most americans aren't. I don't think this will hurt him.


another day, another Edwards "informational" thread started by you. :hi:

[MonkeyFunk]

2. Having a few hundred million in attack ads

thrown against him when he's unable to respond won't hurt him?

[Beaverhausen]

3. IIRC, Gore "went dark" in August of 2000

Most people are on vacation or simply aren't paying attention in August. I don't think it's that big of a deal.

I don't support someone just because they raised more money than someone else. Its the stupidest reason to vote for someone that I can think of.

[MonkeyFunk]

6. We're not just talking about August

we're talking about the period from February to August.

[cali]

4. Over the last 2 months I've started 6 threads about Edwards

I just did a search, so I know. But keep acting like poor long suffering saintly Edwards supporters are just so put upon.

The fact is that people start paying attention during the primaries. That was true in 2004 and it'll be just as true in 2008. It's beyond naive to think that this won't hurt him.

[mother earth]

7. It's crazy to think this will hurt him, this is the very reason I support him!

Thank you, John Edwards! This is why you are the people's candidate, this is why you don't represent the corporation! This is why you represent me, and people like me! Kudos to John Edwards for all of the above!

Naive is to believe we are represented by corporate policy and buy outs...no thanks. You ain't seen nothing until you understand the people ARE what this nation is about. Don't get it yet? Hold on, you are about to get an education.

[ShadesOfGrey]

12. Exactly! nt

[cali]

13. It's clear that you're the one in need of an education

and if JE is the nominee, you'll get it- at the expense of the rest of us.

[mother earth]

16. Poor babe, I'll still hold out hope for you to wake up.

[cali]

18. oh, I'm awake, cupcake

and unlike you, I'm actually somewhat knowledgable about these matters. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to inform yourself.

[mother earth]

22. Oh, I see, you want others to bow to you? How quaint, how very

corporate. ;)

[cali]

25. lol!

how very lame, and inane, sweetums. Knowledge has jackshit to do with corporatism. And you started this little ping pong game with your "poor baby, wake up" condescending comment. I play smash mouth. Don't want to play that version? Don't start with me, pookie.

[mother earth]

28. Enjoy your game, it's all you have sweetie pie....pity and condolences.

[cali]

32. aww, poor old mother earth

starts with the shit and doesn't like getting it back. And couldn't make an intelligent comment on the factual OP if her life depended on it.

[jenmito]

17. You DO realize that he chose to FOREGO matching funds at first, don't you?

He didn't choose to do the "moral" thing and take matching funds until he was unable to raise nearly as much as Obama and Hillary, which last Feb., he thought he WOULD be able to do. Just another phony populist move by Edwards-taken out of desperation, not principle.

[mother earth]

21. No the phoneys had already chosen corporate funding!

Morality? Well, let's just say the so called MSM appointed front-runners also will get a lesson. You have nothing to fear, but fear itself.

[jenmito]

24. Huh? Edwards first chose NOT to take matching funds. Do you not know that?

I think the front-runners are the front-runners because they have many donors. Obama has the MOST donors-regular people giving small donations. Hillary has donors from big business/lobbyists, etc. Sorry Edwards didn't raise nearly as much as he had expected and therefore had no choice but to take matching funds. :shrug:

[Andy823]

39. Well when Edwards wins the Whitehouse back

It will simply prove that going the way of public funding was "not" a mistake.:evilgrin:

[Joe the Revelator]

5. Its crazy to think that people won't pay attention until September

The republicans will frame JE anyway they want to.

JE loss the GE the day he took matching funds. It was a spectacularly stupid idea.

[FrenchieCat]

14. People don't have to be paying attention to still read the headlines.....

and could certainly affect whether we, Democrats, win the White House.

This is an important issue, and not one to attempt to ignore. It will not go away just because we'd rather not deal with the realities. Considering Edwards denouncement of Corporate interests....those same ones and then some others will be lining up from here to there in the form of various 527s to take Edwards down. Considering Edwards denouncement of 527s this primary, he will be painted as a hypocrite if he is seen as using them himself to fight his battle for our side.

It would be one thing if John Edwards had not provided plenty of material on himself, but he has....and none has yet has been truly exploided....but it will.

Edwards was made to disappear during his '04 Veep run, and so, they have yet to really throw their dirt at him; in other words, he has not yet been defined other than with his haircut. If Edwards had the ammunition to fight those who will attack, it would be one thing, but it will be quite another when he is bombarded and has little resource to fight back.

I think that an Edwards nomination will end in a bloodbath, and Democrats will go down in a blazing defeat.

There's a reason that McCain, although eligible, didn't accept matching funds. There is also a reason that Edwards initially state that he would opt out of the public financing system. He himself said that it is the way to competitive....as did his advisor, Joe Trippi.

[Inspired]

8. Can you explain to me why I've seen very little difference

between the campaigning done by Edwards and that of Clinton or Obama in Iowa? Seriously. Edwards didn't have as many TV ads on during the summer months but those early ads by the other candidates have been long forgotten. Sure Hillary took a helicopter when Edwards took a bus but the bus tours across Iowa were a better idea.

I get MORE direct mail from the Edwards campaign or organizations supporting him. I see frequent ads on TV for Edwards now and have been for the past few weeks. His campaign is limited in how much they can spend in Iowa due to the public financing and I've seen little difference. His organization is very strong. He has amazing events...just wait until the reports come back from the This is Our Country Rally next Wednesday night. He has an amazing event planned for tonight in Des Moines.

And he is in a 3 way tie in Iowa.

Jeez....all that and he accepts public financing? I don't see how it has hurt him much so far.

We are prepared when this comes up during phone banking and canvassing. The truth is that he has, and will continue to have, enough money to win.

[maximusveritas]

9. There's a big difference between running a 1-state campaign and a national one

The financing won't probably become an issue unless he gets the nomination.

[MGKrebs]

31. I believe the spending limit in Iowa is $818,000, so I don't know how he's

able to stay competitive as far as ads and mailers go.

edit: It's actually about $1.5 million. That's a lot of money in Iowa.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund_limits_2007.shtml

[ShadesOfGrey]

10. Wanna help? Here ya go...

https://www.johnedwards.com/action/contribute/form/

[MonkeyFunk]

30. Won't matter

He can raise 400 million - he still can't spend more than 50 million before the convention.

[chimpymustgo]

11. Not worried. PEOPLE POWER! Wish you'd get over the "concern".

Edwards - and the party - will pull through - and WIN. Cream rises.

[MGKrebs]

15. Latest FEC info:

7 candidates have been approved. Approved amounts so far:

Joseph Biden
$857,188.89

Christopher Dodd
$1,447,568.09

John Edwards
$8,825,424.82

Duncan Hunter
$100,000

Dennis Kucinich
$100,000

John McCain
$5,812,197.35

Thomas Tancredo
$2,145,125.50

Also: "The maximum amount a candidate could receive is currently estimated to be about $21 million. "
And: "the Commission has estimated that no funds will be available for matching payments in January 2008. As deposits are made from tax returns in the early months of 2008, matching fund payments will be made from those deposits until all certified amounts have been paid. Based on historical patterns, the FEC estimates that funds may not be available to disburse before March 2008."
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20071207cert.shtml

[asdjrocky]

19. One of the corner stone reasons of why I support Edwards.

He's taken a stand. And seriously, he's shown he doesn't have to spend as much, to do more. And also, you know anyone that works harder? If you're a smart enough politician, and you're in the thick of it, you can find ways to get your word out there, without spending a dime.

He's been doing pretty well at that lately.

[cali]

20. He took matching funds because he couldn't raise enough

It's that simple. It wasn't out of moral principle as he now claims. And he's spent well over $20 million by now, most of it in Iowa. That's hardly getting the word out without spending a dime

[mother earth]

23. So what are you so afraid of?

[cali]

27. I'm afraid JE will get a couple of hundred million bucks of negative

framing for 5 months, that will be hard to overcome in Sept and Oct.

[ShadesOfGrey]

29. It doesn't sound like you support him...

so why do you care?

[cali]

33. If he's the dem candidate I'll support him to the max

I find the idea of another repuke president infuckingtolerable. That's why anyone who's not a complete idiot should care.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[asdjrocky]

36. It's tough to raise money, when you've never taken a dime from a lobbyist.

Cal, that's not difficult to understand.

[featherman]

34. I would be far more supportive of John Edwards except for

this very thing. The Dems need to take the White House and nominating a candidate who is so severely restricted in spending through the summer could be disastrous as the GOP has an unchallenged playing field for months and months.

With all the energy around the country to boot the GOP out of power and GOP malaise evidenced by their poor fund raising, the Dems could very well outraise and outspend the GOP this year and take back the Presidency. But not with a candidate who cannot match the GOP in spending for months at a time. You are fooling yourself if you think this would have no effect. Such a candidate would be a sitting duck for the type of smear and misinformation campaign that has been so successful for the GOP the past two cycles. And our "public funding" candidate (Edwards, Dodd, Biden, etal) would be restricted from responding. Very tilted playing field = GOP success.

With only two remaining "unrestricted" candidates this race comes down to Clinton and Obama from a strictly pragmatic point of view. Not what I would prefer but it is the reality.

[David Zephyr]

35. I've posted here many times that I wish John would address this issue. It is not a small handicap.

But on the other hand, he can't even remotely suggest that the 527's would pick up the slack because that would be illegal.

I do imagine that there would be a lot of attorney money readily available for 527's which might carry the day.

[Infinite Hope]

37. I'm not sure that's accurate.

I don't think the spending limit includes primary expenditures.

[MGKrebs]

38. In fact, the spending limits do include the primaries.

The matching fund program only applies to primary funds.

The FEC can provide grants to each nominee for the general election if they choose to accept it, which would be about $75 million for each nominee. Candidates would not need to raise money for the general if they were going to "go public".

Edwards is currently accepting contributions designated for the general election. In other words, a person can actually contribute $4600 to the Edwards campaign by designating $2300 to the primary and $2300 to the general. You would think this would mean that Edwards has already decided to not take public financing for the general, however, there is a segment of fundraising that doesn't get counted against their public totals, and that would be things like attorney fees, so as long as Edwards doesn't exceed whatever the complicated formula is for the allowable expenses, he still may decide to accept public funds for the general.

http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_public_funding.shtml#2004limits