iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Campaign Raises $68 Million For Re-Election, The Democratic Party

KEN THOMAS   01/12/12 03:55 PM ET  AP

Barack Obama

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama hauled in more than $68 million for his campaign and the Democratic Party during the final three months of 2011, a show of force that allows him to compete – for now at least – in the new reality of freewheeling outside political groups.

The latest infusion of money, announced Thursday, adds up to more than $220 million in 2011 for the president's re-election campaign and the Democratic National Committee, putting Obama far ahead of other Republican presidential candidates. In most years, it might amount to a substantial fundraising advantage, but a flurry of super PACs and big-dollar independent groups have changed the rules of campaign money.

Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a video to supporters that they collected more than $42 million for the quarter, with the DNC bringing in more than $24 million, along with $1 million for a joint fund to help state parties in key states. That beat an internal goal of $60 million combined for the quarter.

It came a day after the campaign of Republican front-runner Mitt Romney said it had raised $56 million for the primary through Dec. 31, including $24 million during the final three months of 2011.

Yet, even with the current money advantage over Romney and the rest of the GOP field, Democrats are hoping to remain competitive with Republicans because of the dominance of outside groups.

GOP-supportive super PACs have raised tens of millions of dollars this primary season, notably the Romney-leaning Restore Our Future and American Crossroads, which has said it plans to raise more than $200 million this election cycle. American Crossroads has ties to Karl Rove, a former political adviser to President George W. Bush,

Later this month, the outside groups are expected to disclose how much they have collected during the past six months, figures that will shed more light on their influence.

"We face some daunting odds ... to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars," said Vice President Joe Biden, in a primary night address to New Hampshire Democrats. "These guys have these super PACs now on the Republican side that will spend hundreds of millions of dollars in attack ads. We're not going to have those hundreds of millions of dollars in super PACs."

Republicans counter that Obama is more concerned with his re-election campaign than with his job of running the country, pointing to his fundraising edge on the GOP field. Republican National Committee spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski said "the White House may try to pretend the president isn't focused on his re-election, but Americans know he's more interested in campaigning to save his own job than creating jobs for our country's unemployed."

The president's campaign has watched with concern as the outside groups have escalated a race for political money and roiled the Republican primary season, most notably the campaign of Newt Gingrich.

The former House speaker built a lead in Iowa only to watch it erode under a $3 million tidal wave of negative ads launched by the outside group supporting Romney, who eventually won a razor-thin victory in the leadoff caucuses. Gingrich finished fourth.

Restore Our Future has reserved $2.3 million in air time in South Carolina ahead of the states' primaries, while a pro-Gingrich group, Winning Our Future, has said it plans to spend $3.4 million on ads attacking Romney for jobs lost while he served as a top executive at private equity firm Bain Capital. Winning Our Future's effort was bankrolled by casino owner Sheldon Adelson, who gave $5 million to the pro-Gingrich super PAC. Outside groups backing Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum have also exerted influence.

Crossroads, for its part, says it is largely holding off ads until the general election, to counterbalance the anticipated flood of money from donors to Obama and the DNC.

Democratic-leaning groups like Priorities USA Action, founded by former Obama advisers, have not spent nearly the same amount as their GOP counterparts. Through late July, Priorities USA Action and sister organization Priorities USA had raised more than $5 million and has spent roughly $320,000 on ads and media-production costs opposing Romney, federal filings show.

David Axelrod, the Obama campaign's senior strategist, said the emergence of the super PACs represented a "concerning dynamic" for Democrats, likening it to facing "the secret air force and have them carpet bomb relentlessly."

"The prospect of hundreds of millions of dollars of negative ads raining down on us is not a prospect that I relish," Axelrod said in a conference call with reporters last week. But he said Obama was "thoroughly known to the American people," making him less susceptible to negative attacks.

With the prospect of a deluge of money opposing the president, Obama's campaign has tried to bat away suggestions that it will raise more than $1 billion, a substantial boost from the $750 million it raised in 2008. Messina said in the video that the lofty figures have created "a challenge that keeps coming up. Too many Obama supporters think we don't need their money or they don't need to give now."

"The billion-dollar number is completely untrue," Messina said.

Obama's campaign has emphasized a large number of donors and small donations generated from online giving. Messina said the campaign and DNC had generated 1.3 million donors, with 583,000 people giving during the most recent quarter. More than 98 percent were for donations of $250 or less and the average donation was $55, he said.

The money will help build Obama's organization, pay for a massive advertising campaign and let his advisers prepare for the upcoming campaign, a point the president emphasized at a large Chicago fundraiser on Wednesday night.

"If you're willing to work even harder in this election than you did in that last election, I promise you change will come," Obama said. "If you stick with me, we're going to finish what we started in 2008."

___

Associated Press writer Jack Gillum contributed to this report.

___

Follow Ken Thomas on Twitter at http://twitter.com/AP_Ken_Thomas

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Jade Walker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,543
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (83 total)
photo
purplewg
If your response is baseless, I have no response
09:43 AM on 01/18/2012
$220 million? I suppose all that came from the little guys giving $20-$25 huh?
Harpo1129
You can't spell Progressive without Progress
11:56 AM on 01/16/2012
lmercierky 37 Fans Become a fan Unfan
23 minutes ago(11:27 AM)

"One thing is Fox is fair and balanced, I get the liberal and dem and rep ways of handling arguments and a lot of internet comentator­s and companies like Patriot. Probably 10 or 15 companies on line and some from Aol and Huffington post, does that satisfy you mr teacher? Are you going to demand that I cannot use Fox News, sounds like obama telling me I cannot eat McDonalds food, it is called a dictator."
_______________________________________________

Hey lmercierky. The fact that you TRULY believe that Fox is fair and balanced proves just how uninformed you really are. Fox is neither fair NOR balanced as any thinking person knows. They even went to court to win the RIGHT to lie to it's viewers. And PRESIDENT Obama never said that you "CANNOT" eat McDonalds. Maybe it was implied that one could eat BETTER than the junk served at McDonalds but he NEVER SAID that you CAN'T eat at McDonalds. See, if you got your news from someplace other than Fox, you would KNOW that.
photo
itiswhatitmaybe
My micro-bio is NOT empty, it's contemplating.
08:54 AM on 01/14/2012
If Pres Obama had a good record to stand on he wouldn't need all this campaign money.
photo
frdm399
Freedom is about choice
08:39 PM on 01/13/2012
No doubt he's a great fund raiser and campaigner. Too bad he's not a very good leader.
06:41 PM on 01/13/2012
Wow, 68 million clamsters raised in the quarter before the election year is quite a formidable campaign asset. But Barack's crisscrossing the U.S. in search of donations and general election votes has me concern about a different Obama asset. Whose watching his pricey Chicago home while he's away? And if those walls could talk, would the words sound something like this humorous YouTube video. Enjoy: http://tinyurl.com/6sevqsj
03:31 PM on 01/13/2012
President Obama must do what the Spanish President did:
DISSOLVE THE CONGRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LudeDude714
02:06 PM on 01/13/2012
The rule change in 2010 by the supreme court and Citizen’s United to allow unlimited and anonymous contributions by special interests groups is bassackwards. They should have capped the spending allowed to say one million and anything over will go toward the debt or to replace the money taken out of SS by Presidents and Congress over the decades. There would be no outrageous commercials full of lies and it would force the average voter to research the candidates like we should instead of letting other people and news shows on T. V. and radio make up your mind for you. It will never happen because the politicians like the voters to be ignorant and blind to the whole process, they want you to think they care about you and the plight of the poor and working class. In reality, Democrat or Republican only care about the people and businesses who gave them this money to get them elected, the rich. It is an endless cycle because every election a new wave of voters come of age and are like lemmings ready to follow the lies told to them by these leaders, a few of them will figure it out that it does not matter which party is in power they only care about the rich but most will listen blindly to left wing and right wing groups who brainwash them into believing only one party is to blame when in reality it is both parties.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LudeDude714
01:51 PM on 01/13/2012
They changed the rules in 2010 to allow unlimited contributions from special interest groups, they also changed the rule that you have to disclose who gave you the money. For the first time in history more money was spent on a mid term election and it changed the power in DC. The fact that special interests have more influence in the democratic process than ever before is not a key issue for either party – it is a key issue for both parties. In order to protect the democratic process from undue influence, lawmakers must act to prevent another election cycle of limitless and anonymous spending. Without Congress passing a statute, you can be sure history will remember 2010 for the transforming decision of Citizen’s United. If special interests remain unlimited in the 2012 cycle, expect an unprecedented level of influence from the outside that shatters the record books. Now both parties can accept money from China, the KKK or anti-American groups and not have to say where the money came from, when someone gives a candidate millions of dollars they expect a favor in return. In 1996 Bill Clinton found out that the KKK gave him $10,000 and he returned the money, now they can keep that money because no one will know where it came from, the face of politics has changed forever.
photo
blessedfrog
Smedley Butler
12:40 PM on 01/13/2012
It's a good time to be a yard sign printer.
11:53 AM on 01/13/2012
tax all campaign funds 70% problem solved
11:40 AM on 01/13/2012
you want to tax the the rich so bad tax the campaign funds 70% theirs your 1%
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
louistruj
07:53 AM on 01/13/2012
MY GOD,WHERE IS ALL THAT MONEY COMING FROM? I THOUGHT WE'D HAVE AN ECONOMICAL FUND RAISING CAMPAIGN DOWNED ECONOMY;ALL THOSE MILLIONS BEING SPENT AND NO JOBS.I'M SURE MANY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFULS THAT DON'T GET NOMINATED WILL HAVE SURPLUS COFFERS AND LET'S PRESSURE THEM TO DONATE IT TO CHARITY;US AMERICANS,WHO ARE IN NEED AND ARE IN GREATER NEED AND DON'T HAVE IT.
10:40 AM on 01/13/2012
Wall Street bonuses and stimulus money.. where else?
12:05 PM on 01/13/2012
From folks who don't want a Republican in the WH.

Individual donors to the Obama campaign is approaching 1,000,000.

Individual donors to Romney, 55,000. They also give in larger chunks and looking for a return on their investment -- big time.
07:13 AM on 01/13/2012
Add in the previous campaign's move on group, and the other super PACs like the other out of power Party is trying to develop, and we will have a nice 2012 election year.

I can see the names of the groups now that will come from the "grass roots" of the Democrat Party, Puppy Loving Kids for a Living Wage.

The Democrat and Republican parties will hit critical mass with their advertising and their sarrogates' crazy rhetooric and hopefully, people will start thinking for themselves about the matters that affect them.
photo
ssaintc
Be gentle to all and stern with yourself.
01:25 AM on 01/13/2012
While the fundraising numbers will help cement Romney's frontrunner status, there are some troubles lurking in the details.

While the campaign saw a 73 percent increase in the total number of donors in the third quarter, it only raised contributions from 55,000 individual donors.

By comparison, Romney's primary opponent Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) announced donations from 100,000 individual donors in the third quarter alone,

and the campaign of President Barack Obama is nearing the 1,000,000 donor mark for the year.