2016 Postmortem

nitpicker

(7,153 posts) Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:13 AM Apr 2015

Hillary Clinton embraces ((not so)) small donors in early fundraising

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clinton-2016-small-donors-early-fundraising-116938.html

Hillary Clinton embraces small donors in early fundraising
By Anna Palmer and Tarini Parti

Money won’t buy a title in Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

The former secretary of state isn’t naming a finance chair in her latest bid for the White House, according to several sources close to her campaign. The move is part of a larger strategy of trying to maintain a nimble campaign structure and avoid the mistakes of her 2008 bid when she was criticized for building out a massive and overpaid staff.

(snip)
For now, the campaign isn’t asking for big checks. Donors on the call were asked to consider becoming Hillstarters and to raise $27,000 in the next 30 days — a relatively small amount for a presidential bid that is expected to raise $2.5 billion. The focus for now, donors say, is to bring in $2,700 checks from individuals, or the maximum contribution for a primary.

“There’s a space for donors who are at the lower level and they are validated and appreciated,” said Tom Sheridan, a D.C. lobbyist who wasn’t on the call but has co-hosted past Ready for Hillary fundraisers and plans to raise money for Clinton .
((snip))

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary Clinton embraces ((not so)) small donors in early fundraising (Original Post) nitpicker Apr 2015 OP

Those Koch Brothers will be kicking in to the GOP kitty; so long as we have to deal with the MADem Apr 2015 #1

That will occur later in the BIG fundraisers nitpicker Apr 2015 #3

Oh sure, it's tiered, the way these things work. There are different donor lists, depending on how MADem Apr 2015 #4

The irony nitpicker Apr 2015 #2

MADem

(135,425 posts)

1. Those Koch Brothers will be kicking in to the GOP kitty; so long as we have to deal with the

Reply to nitpicker (Original post)

Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:29 AM

Apr 2015

whole MONEY EQUALS SPEECH dynamic, we'll have to fundraise better than the other side.

nitpicker

(7,153 posts)

3. That will occur later in the BIG fundraisers

Reply to MADem (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:39 AM

Apr 2015

But most of the people I know can only afford 20.16. 50, 100 dollars.

Even if 10 million give $50 apiece, $500 million will only be part of the total needed. The rest will have to come from elsewhere, whether it be from "Hillstarters" or ((probably)) mostly from the big hitters.

MADem

(135,425 posts)

4. Oh sure, it's tiered, the way these things work. There are different donor lists, depending on how

Reply to nitpicker (Reply #3)

Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:53 AM

Apr 2015

much scratch one can pony up. One of the things that READY FOR HILLARY was doing was amassing a large rank-and-file donor list--they had a cap on their contribution amount, but their goal was to develop a list of names so that they can go back to the well once the show starts, if needs must.

And of course, there are going to be so many attack ads on TV that the media buys will cost a bundle. Ugh--not looking forward to that. I guess I'll be keeping premium cable for a while--at least I can go to a movie instead!!!

nitpicker

(7,153 posts)

2. The irony

Reply to nitpicker (Original post)

Wed Apr 15, 2015, 04:29 AM

Apr 2015

I have just gone through "file your taxes for free" with IRS's Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) program, aimed at those with incomes of about $50,000 or ((a lot)) less. I'm not sure if parts of this article were written with tongue in cheek, considering the source. However, on the face of it, it looks like a partial continuation of "Queen Hillary 2007", where she took over a whole parking lot on a military base while the other candidates rode in on a bus. Given the cocoon of lifetime Secret Service protection, it is to be expected that Hillary does not live on the same planet as my "free prep" clients. But this is an advertised push to at least reach beyond the "earls" to the "gentry".

Reply to this discussion