Hillary to PBS: I Knew All Last Spring

CLINTON EXPECTED THIS SCENARIO, 1 YEAR AGO

Democrat Hillary Clinton told PBS interviewer Judy Woodruff today about a remarkable display of clairvoyance that found the New York senator in the spring of 2007 planning a Texas showdown with Barack Obama on Tuesday.

During an interview with PBS’ “Newshour” program, Woodruff asked Clinton what happened in a race where only months ago she was viewed as the frontrunner and the presumptive nominee, only to be eclipsed by Obama.

“None of this is surprising to me,” Hillary Clinton told Woodruff. “You know, last spring when I looked at how the race was shaping up, I knew that it would be a close contest and I assumed it would be with Sen. Obama and at that time I said, ‘We have got to start thinking about Texas. We have to start thinking ahead.’”

Clinton also said she really doesn’t like the front-runner label, even though the primaries in Texas and Ohio on Tuesday will determine whether her Democratic presidential bid will continue.

“I think it is great that this has been a close contest. I don’t have any problem with that. I don’t think I’m entitled to anything,” she said. “I hate being a front runner.”

–

“It is better to be defeated on principle than to win on lies.” - A. Calwell

Indeed Clinton saw far enough into the future nearly one year ago, that she planned a short-sighted campaign which ran out of money and had a flurry of staff shake ups. For Texas, she was so forward-thinking, she neglected to allocate proper resources and set up a sufficient ground organization in the state.

Just last week, when discussing the Texas delegate nominating system, she said:

“I had no idea how bizarre it is,” Sen. Clinton told reporters last week. “We have grown men crying over it.”

SOURCE: Clinton: Saw Texas Shootout with Obama Coming
SOURCE: Two-Step Vote Could Trip Up Clinton

Published in: on February 29, 2008 at 9:51 am Comments (0)
Tags: , , , ,

The Anatomy of Fiscal Responsibility

HILLARY CLINTON’S CAMPAIGN SPENDING BLUES

Hillary Clinton planned only for a race that would end by February 5th. A lack of contingency planning and fiscal resourcefulness has left her scrambling ever since, to the tune of 11 straight losses to Barack Obama.

  • Did high-priced consultants and lavish hotels seal her doom? At the end of January, the senator had to lend her campaign $5 million and still had $7.6 million in outstanding debts.

Jan 2008 spending -

  • $100,000 for party platters and groceries before the Iowa caucuses
  • $25,000 for rooms at the Bellagio luxury hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada
  • $217,000 for car rentals at Hertz and Enterprise
  • $5 million for top consultants including:

- Mark Penn, chief strategist, and team collected $3.8 million in January - total billing: $10 million
- Howard Wolfson, communications director, earned $267,000 in January - total billing: $730,000

  • $2.3 million to Mandy Grunwald’s firm for advertising (Grunwald is a long-time media adviser to both Bill and Hillary Clinton)
  • $11,000 on pizza…!
  • $275,000 to a firm to attract black voters in South Carolina (she lost to Obama by a large margin)
  • $95,000 for sandwiches to deliver to Iowa caucuses (she lost to both Obama and Edwards)

So far, $106 million has been spent on the failing campaign and the donors aren’t happy:

“We didn’t raise all of this money to keep paying consultants who have pursued basically the wrong strategy for a year now,” said a prominent New York donor. “So much about her campaign needs to change — but it may be too late.”

Political analysts also say that Hillary Clinton’s spending priorities are what crippled her competitiveness.

Barack Obama has spent his own share of mega-funds. The difference? His expenses for consultants are nearly half that of Hillary Clinton’s. He also invested more of his money than Clinton in media, polling and voter outreach which clearly paid off. Clinton spent $23 million on “other” expenses to Obama’s $15 million. Obama also continues to out-raise Clinton in donor contributions.

  • Perhaps there is something to be said for Barack Obama’s stance that “good judgment on day 1″ trumps being “ready on day 1″.

SOURCE: Donors Worried by Clinton Campaign Spending

ALSO READ: A Rundown: Is This How Hillary Will Lead Our Country?

Published in: on February 23, 2008 at 11:16 am Comments (0)
Tags: , , ,

Hillary Charges Interest on Her Campaign Loan

SOME CLINTON DONORS WILL PAY INTEREST

In January, Hillary Clinton’s campaign was struggling for money, prompting her to loan the campaign $5 million out of her own pocket. Since then she has seen an influx of donations from sympathetic supporters. Questions raised about where the $5 million came from have been largely unanswered.

Senator Clinton said she would only release her tax returns to the public if she wins the nomination.

THE GOOD NEWS:

Clinton makes a profit from her generosity.

Campaign finance documents filed on Wednesday show that Hillary is charging her campaign an interest rate of 1.26 percent.

So, who pays this interest? Donor contributions, of course. Just $63,000 (or $5250.00 a month) if paid back at the end of 1 year.

Mitt Romney also loaned his campaign funding from his pocket. He did not charge his campaign interest.

SOURCE: Clinton to be paid interest on campaign loan

RECORDS FOR ALL CANDIDATES: Finance Reports - Federal Election Commission

Published in: on February 22, 2008 at 3:50 pm Comments (0)
Tags: , ,

A Rundown: Is This How Hillary Will Lead Our Country?

READY FROM DAY 1?

“35 years of experience”, she says … but many see a lack of organization, a lack of leadership, a lack of appointing the right people in the right positions, a lack of good judgment, a lack of integrity and clearly a lack of financial responsibility.

Will Hillary run our country likes she’s running this campaign?

    Published in: on February 14, 2008 at 3:54 am Comments (1)
    Tags: , , , ,

    Hillary Camp Says: Now We Are Ready for the Little People?

    “I THINK NOW WE ARE IN THE POSITION OF LOOKING FOR THE LITTLE CHECKS.” 

    Some have emailed me that they are offended by the latest remark to come out of Hillary camp. They feel the statement above references “the little people”. Not sure if I agree with that, but I do see it underscores a shift in Hillary’s fundraising strategy.

    It’s no secret that Hillary’s pre-Super Tuesday donors are maxed out. 70% of them have donated the maximum of amount allowable per campaign. For Obama supporters, only 3% of them have donated the maximum amount.

    This is because Obama has a larger amount of donors (650,000 pre-Super Tuesday) who donate smaller amounts, and hence have the ability to give repeat donations.

    Now, strapped for cash and seeing the success of Obama’s fund-raising, it seems she has decided imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Her call for $3 million dollars in 72 hours suspiciously came on the same day (although hours after) a similar fundraiser showed up on Obama’s website and was emailed out from supporters called “48 Hour Fundraiser”.
    Of course, Hillary is intelligent to look for new donations online. Such donations have raised millions for both Barack Obama and Ron Paul.

    Her request for cash sent out to her mailing list, coupled with a release from her camp to the press that she had to loan money from her own pocket and have her staff work without pay also stimulated donations. (Some suspect that was the goal all along, especially since she later claimed that her staff did not actually go without pay.)

    Now a bundler for Hillary’s campaign in California, Susie Tompkins Buell, said she remains optimistic, even though many donors she has contacted have given the maximum allowed. “The campaign has gone on much longer than any of us expected,” Buell said. “I think now we are in the position of looking for the little checks. We’re trying to find out how best to do that.” The Clinton campaign reported attracting 40,000 new online donors yesterday.

    • What do you think?

    Read full article

    Published in: on February 8, 2008 at 10:29 pm Comments (1)
    Tags: , , ,

    Hillary Campaign Spent Half Million $$$ Last Year — for Parking?

    If Hillary Clinton keeps saying her 35 years of experience is so significant, why did she spend nearly THREE TIMES AS MUCH as Obama on political and media consultants? SOURCE

    Hillary Clinton: Spent nearly $4 million on political and media consultants

    Barack Obama: Spent about $1.4 million on political and media consultants

    Interesting. So Barack spends less money with better results.

    Hillary also spent $500,000 on parking last year. See the breakdown of financing below between the two candidates.

    • 2007 HILLARY CLINTON FUND RAISING - SOURCE

    Individual contributions — $103,611,269 90%
    PAC* contributions — $959,719 1%

    Candidate self-financing — $0 0%
    Federal Funds — $0 0%
    Other — $11,081,373 10%

    • 2007 BARACK OBAMA FUND RAISING - SOURCE

    Individual contributions — $101,429,472 99%
    PAC contributions — $25 0%

    Candidate self-financing — $0 0%
    Federal Funds — $0 0%
    Other — $741,170 1%

    *Political action committees, or PACs, have been a fixture of the American political scene since organized labor invented them in 1943 as a loophole around federal campaign laws.

    Click here for more info on what a PAC Contribution is.

    Read Today’s Washington Post Article below:

    Aggressive Obama TV Spending Prompted Clinton’s Loan

    Published in: on at 4:57 pm Comments (0)
    Tags: , , ,