Campaign Finance

Obama Campaign Outspent, Outraised Romney, Also Spent More Than It Brought In (Familiar?)

|

advantage Obama

President Obama may end up becoming the boy who cried wolf in his "I will be outspent" fundraising campaign.  Documents filed with the FEC show the Obama campaign raised $46 million in June but spent $58 million. The Romney campaign raised less but was also fiscally disciplined, raising $33 million and spending $27.5 million. The Obama campaign also has more cash on hand, $97.5 million to the Romney campaign's $22.5 million. Earlier this month, the Romney campaign said it had raised more than $100 million along with the RNC in June while the Obama campaign said it and the DNC had raised $71 million. 

Where has all that spending gotten the campaigns? A CNN/Opinion Research poll at the end of May had Obama at 49 percent and Romney at 46 percent and a CNN/Opinion Research poll at the end of July had… Obama at 49 percent and Romney at 46 percent, giant douche vs. turd sandwich polling territory. 

More 2012 Election Reason coverage

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

58 responses to “Obama Campaign Outspent, Outraised Romney, Also Spent More Than It Brought In (Familiar?)

  1. Documents filed with the FEC show the Obama campaign raised $46 million in June but spent $58 million. The Romney campaign raised less but was also fiscally disciplined, raising $33 million and spending $27.5 million

    and

    Earlier this month, the Romney campaign said it had raised more than $100 million along with the RNC in June while the Obama campaign said it and the DNC had raised $71 million.

    huh?

    1. It means most of the money raised by Romney and the Republicans was raised by the RNC and state committees, while most of the money raised by Obama and the Democrats was raised by Obama.

      1. God bless our Campaigner in Chief?!

  2. I’ve never seen a pro-Romney commercial.

    I see Obama’s “Rich people are the problem” commercial every time I turn the TV on. Irony?

    1. I haven’t seen a single ad for either. But then again, I have a TiVo, so I don’t watch any commercials.

      1. Obama doesn’t have to spend a dime on advertising in Washington state.

      2. Also, Epi’s TiVo is jammed full of TVLand episodes of Facts of Life. Neither campaign really cares to advertise to people who watch that.

        1. Like you don’t have a crush on Natalie too. Did I just say that out loud?

          1. I haz the fever.

            And I think we all know what I’m talking about.

      3. It must suck living in a swing state. I’ve lived in Oregon almost my entire life, and the only presidential campaign commercial I recall having seen was a Bob Dole ad denouncing Bill Clinton’s “midnight basketball” program. I remember it vividly because it actually worked and made me angry that the government would waste money on something like that.

        1. I’ve lived in two.

          The Obama ads were crazy in 2008, I’ve never seen anything like it. Every commercial break had that promise to not raise taxes on people making 250K or less. It was nonstop.

          1. Took him less than a week to break the “not one thin dime” promise by signing SCHIP.

        2. I rarely watch live TV, so I just skip the commercials with my DVR, but I do listen to talk radio when I’m driving. I’m very surprised by the number of Obama ads I hear on talk radio. What genius decided that the same radio station that airs Beck and Limbaugh would be a good place to spend money on Obama ads?

    2. I only just started seeing the Obama ad with Romney doing his off-key singing. Painful.

      Of course, the Romney campaign could easily put together embarrassing Obama clips (“57 states,” “corpse-man,” etc.), but it’s dismaying to see the low road taken so soon.

    3. I live in New York. Obama’s going to win by 20 points so I doubt we’re going to get any presidential campaign ads.

      1. I’ve seen a bunch of Obama ads on TV and I live in Brooklyn, comparatively few Romney ads but there have been a couple.

    4. I saw an anti-Romney abortion commercial last night.

      I live in Pennsylvania, so I guess that shouldn’t be a surprise, but I’ve only lived in Texas before, where political commercials are about who’s more conservative/less corrupt. (Including the ones from the Democrats.)

  3. heller – here in ohio, we’re under constant bombardment of pro and anti whichever ads 24/7. suxs

    1. you’re free to leave at any time.

    2. I can testify to this as well. Most of the ads seem to be Obama “RICH PEOPLE AND OIL COMPANIES ARE EVUL” commercials.

  4. I’ve heard from other sources the reason for Romney’s restraint: a lot of his money was intended for the general election campaign, and therefore (under federal law) cannot be spent until after the Republican convention.

    Obama does not face the same restriction because he no longer has any declared primary opponent (but Ron Paul is still officially in the GOP race until the convention).

    1. So Ron Paul is forcing Romney’s ‘fiscal discipline.’ Were it only so for the next four years of Prez Romney.

      1. Both Obama and Romney have niche opponents who hardly anyone has heard of, and thus both are constrained by those (unconstitutional) primary versus general election regs.

  5. Which makes it all the more sickening that Obama still plays the underdog card and his supporters buy it.

    1. Yup. In California we keep hearing about how the evil rich are going to buy this election with their Citizens United Super PACs, and everybody better put Obama on their wedding registry because that’s the only chance he will have against corporashuns.

      1. In 2008, before Citizens United, Obama effectively killed campaign finance reform when he broke his promise to accept the Federal funds. He spent over $750 million to Colonel Tigh’s $370 million. And the pathetic thing is that the Obama cultists are convinced that he’s incorruptible and that he doesn’t get most of his money from bundlers.

        1. Obama’s campaign turned off every single credit card verification check for online donations, so that anybody could donate any amount in any name from any country. But that’s OK because they can be trusted.

    2. Obama lied?

      Say it ain’t so.

    3. Well, Sarah Silverman whored herself out to Obama a while ago, so it’s only natural that she’d act as if Team Red’s the only other customer left.

  6. Obama better stay out there raising more money.

    He’s gonna need every penny of it to win, too.

  7. They unexpectedly outraised, outspent,and out-deficited Romney.

    1. Nicely done.

  8. Another trick they use is to compare the numbers raised by Obama’s campaign itself to the total of the dollars raised by Romney, the RNC, and every outside anti-Obama group.

    So while “Restore our Future” gets counted for Romney, “Priorites USA” and the others don’t get counted for Obama.

    1. Because Obama only begrudgingly has accepted that evil Super PACs are a political necessity, and doesn’t really want their support, whereas Romney wouldn’t have a chance at all were it not for his awful “outside money.”

      Or something.

      1. Obama hates Super PACs, but he will take Super PAC money in order to keep himself in the White House because he “deserves a second term.”

        Principles? What are those?

        1. he “deserves a second term.”

          Do you feel you deserve to _________?

          Old psychotherapy trick.

  9. Hehe. That douche and turd sandwich wiki link links back to reason.

  10. President Obama may end up becoming the boy

    RACIST

    1. Give it up, shrike.

  11. …the Obama campaign raised $46 million in June but spent $58 million.

    Deficit spending?

    1. Stimulus1!!!!1!1!

  12. I love the internet, because every day, you get lied to by at least one side, and maybe by both.

    http://slatest.slate.com/posts…..ising.html

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan is dead, cold, moldly worm food. Everybody gets their own facts now. Just click the hyperlink for your team and get the facts exactly the way you want them to be.

    I don’t know why “Reason” is so invested in the narrative of the Obama side having more campaign money than the greatest alliance of billionares the Republican party has ever assembled in history, but it is.

    Team Fusionism, alive and well.

    1. I don’t know why “Reason” is so invested in the narrative of the Obama side having more campaign money than the greatest alliance of billionares the Republican party has ever assembled in history, but it is.

      Obama’s money is holy and good, Romney’s money is evil and tainted with the tainty-taintness of “billionaires.” Got it.

      Now go find your binky and take a nap.

      1. Plus, your linked article quotes a man named “Bob Beer Sack”. Must be a parody, not real news.

        1. “alliance of billionares the Republican party has ever assembled”

          Notice he ignores the billionaires fronting for the Democrat party.

          1. Because they have the best interests of the American people in mind, not like those dirty billionaires supporting the Republican party only looking out for themselves.

            1. Yeah, I forgot… George Soros is all about ALL freedoms, and he didn’t let his childhood experiences with the Nazis get in the way of clear thinking.

    2. RAL, this doesn’t even make any fucking sense.

      First of all, each link presents the same facts. If you are talking about spin, then that’s a different thing altogether. But you have to specify.

      I don’t know why “Reason” is so invested in the narrative of the Obama side having more campaign money than the greatest alliance of billionares the Republican party has ever assembled in history, but it is.

      Alternatively, you might note that one candidate out-and-out lied (as he likes to do…frequently…about everything) about being outspent, so getting in cheap digs is fun.

    3. Oh No!

      The alliance of billionares are coming to steal our democracy.

      1. Soros and Buffet?

        1. You’ll make shrike have a sad, joshua.

    4. I don’t know why “Reason” is so invested in the narrative of the Obama side having more campaign money than the greatest alliance of billionares the Republican party has ever assembled in history, but it is.

      I don’t think “Reason” (is Reason really legion?) gives a shit. In fact campaigns spending lots of money at its core is probably seen as a good thing by “Reason”. How else can people be informed?

      The problem for “Reason” is Obama is making the claim that money in campaigns is bad and that his opponent is outspending him…not only is it a lie, but a lie that Obama is using to make the false claim that money in campaigns is bad. That sort of hypocrisy is “Reason’s” bread and butter.

  13. The Koch Brothers are spending all that money on Obozo, so Romney will be able to make dear leader look like a shabby liar.

  14. I desire to be a millionare, therefore I am working for a billionare.

  15. Obama is The Boy Who Cried Racist. Read the #ObamaKidsBooks feed.

  16. what Peter said I didnt know that any one able to earn $7671 in one month on the internet. did you read this page makecash16com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.