We've reported many times on the degree to which Mitt Romney's presidential campaign has relied on votes from wealthy Republicans to help his candidacy thrive during the Republican primaries. But let's also not forget the role of the Thurston Howell demographic when it comes to financial support.
BuzzFeed's Zeke Miller recently noted that the most recent federal campaign finance filings help show that Romney is "more dependent on wealthy donors" than any modern major-party nominee. I've adapted some of Zeke's data to put together this chart.
How much is Romney struggling with small-donor contributions? As of the end of March, even Ron Paul and Rick Santorum had raised more money in small donations than the presumptive Republican nominee.
The larger contrast for the general election is even more striking. President Obama, at this point in the race, has persuaded a very large number of people to contribute modest sums to help establish a formidable financial base. Mitt Romney, meanwhile, has persuaded a very small number of people to make massive contributions.
In practical terms, this may not matter as much as it should -- thanks to five members of the Supreme Court, Romney's wealthy backers can make unlimited contributions to entities like Karl Rove's super PAC, and given the riches of folks like the Koch brothers, it's basically a bottomless-well of campaign cash that will finance attack ads through Election Day.
But the disparity nevertheless helps make clear who constitutes Romney's "base," and what income bracket they tend to be in.
Leave a Comment:
They tried buying tea-party candidates last time round. This time they're sticking to one of their own.
"Just relax Mitten's, we have enough money to buy you a presidency "
It is extremely pathetic all the way around. I hope Obama wins so hegemony (at least with the wrong wing) loses. I gave the Obama campaign hundreds of dollars the first time around, this time I gave them $3.00 and told them don't expect another dime.
Thanks goes to John Roberts and Citizen's United for the wealthy to be able to BUY this election from the people! Justice Roberts should be removed from the bench and be barred from practicing law. He obviously has no concept of what his ignorance has cost the American public!
What it makes me wonder is what candidate traditionally wins the election, given equal funds? The candidate with the broad base of financial sources or the candidate with the handful of financial sources?
How much does the median contribution differ from the mean contribution?
The Bible says that, "Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." If nothing else shows where Romney's favor would go, this certainly does. Anyone who thinks Romney, or the Republican party in general, cares about people like you and me is seriously delusional.
Dems have always been better at mobilizing people rather than fundraising. If Romney can be beat, the superpacs influence will be diminished. The first chance at demonstrating the Dems ability to mobilize is the Walker recall. A large victory would force Romney and the Republicans to reassess their strategy for buying the elections. The next chance would be the elections in November and Dems should mobilize in every swing district and those districts that are not overwhelmingly safe for Republicans. Make them spend money defending these districts and deprive other candidates funds for reelection. This will be hurt Republicans in those areas where there are Tea Party challengers in safe districts.
Would love it if you guys would humor me and revise the figure to add units to the y-axis :) I'd also be interesting in seeing the st dev (or some other measure of the distribution).