Â
Total receipts for Mark Green’s campaign in the first six months of 2006: $1,682,009.
Total receipts for Jim Doyle’s campaign in the first six months of 2006: $1,622,857.
That’s right – Mark Green’s campaign outraised Jim Doyle’s these last six months.
Expenditures by Mark Green’s campaign in the first six months of 2006: $641,404
Expenditures by Jim Doyle’s campaign in the first six months of 2006: $644, 219.
That’s right- Mark Green spent just as much money on voter outreach these last six months as Doyle’s campaign.
Those are two SHOCKING figures, folks! That Green was able to out-raise the incumbent governor in hard money is I think literally unprecedented. That a challenger was able to spend just as much money as the incumbent on voter outreach is pretty rare.
Green reported $3.17 million in the bank as of June 30th, while Doyle reported $5.17 million. Since the report, Doyle has spent ~$300k on his first TV ad, and Green raised ~$700k at an event featuring President Bush. In other words, as of this very moment Green and Doyle are separated by only about $1 million in hard cash. That’s extrordinary.
Look back at recent history – the 2002 campaign when challenger Doyle defeated incumbent McCallum: “Doyle spent $5,932,713 in 1999-02, largely on consulting, advertising and fundraising. Most of his spending occurred in the election year when he doled out $5.23 million to defeat McCallum, who spent $7 million in 1999-02, nearly $1.1 million more than Doyle.” I think Doyle and Green will match one another almost dollar for dollar from now until Election Day in hard money fundraising. Doyle will bring in Barak Obama, Green will bring in Rudy Guiliani, etc. In the final analysis, I would bet Doyle’s campaign outspends Green’s by about $1 million, almost all of which will be spent on advertising. Given Doyle’s lackluster polling, he’ll need every penny (I’ll comment on today’s Strategic Vision and Rasmussen numbers tomorrow).
All of this, by the way, is prefaced by “hard money,” or the up to $10,000 a gubernatorial candidate can raise for his own campaign, Doyle for Wisconsin or Green for Wisconsin.
The numbers you don’t see disclosed to the State Election Board are those of the left-leaning Greater Wisconsin Committee and right-leaning Coalition for America’s Families, Wisconsin’s two top independent “issue ad” (i.e. negative attaqck ad) spenders. No one argues that GWC has far more cash than CAF, thanks to WEAC and the casino interests. That’s okay – among the top 5 spending 527s in the 2004 presidential race, 4 were liberal and one was conservative. The liberals outspent the conservative $282.2 million to $35.6 million. But, that didn’t stop the good people of this nation from reelecting President Bush, did it?
The sum of all these numbers: two observations. First, I think Green campaign manager Mark Graul is absolutely 100% right with this comment, “[Doyle] knows he has no chance to win this election if he and Mark Green spend the same amount of money.” Second, even with Doyle’s lead of $1 million in hard money and several million in soft money, Green still has a great chance of winning this thing in spite of being outspent by millions from Doyle’s shakedown operation.
P.S. Falk outraises Lautenschlager, has 2 to 1 lead in cash on hand. I’m really torn, but I think I’m actually rooting for Falk to win this thing. I think a Falk candidacy in the general will depress liberal turnout statewide, and I’d much rather have the GOP candidate running television ads attacking Falk for wanting to let convicts back on the streets than a whispering campaign about drunk driving. If a comment-leaver wants to convince me we’d rather take on Lautenschlager, be my guest.
Last 5 posts by Daniel- Tom Barrett's Savings Plan - June 8th, 2010
- C.J. Abrahamson on J. Stevens - April 11th, 2010
- Why always Bill Bablitch? - March 24th, 2010
- Suhr on Nixon on Health Care - February 23rd, 2010
- Did the USCCB Foresee Dead People? - February 8th, 2010
Money can’t buy votes, pal.
No, but it sure can rent ‘em.
(Sorry, I just had to. Making that comment in politics is like saying “Knock Knock” to a child.)
First of all, the only thing you are capable of reporting is how much money every candidate has… wow… bravo, I’m really impressed. I think your expensive Marquette education is necessary for those creative blog posts.
I’m sure you’ve heard of the carry-over effect in advertising. Doyle has been in office for 4 years and has 4 years of free advertising as the governor. That’s statewide coverage… to outraise Doyle by $60,000 in the last six months is laughable. He’s going to need a lot more than that. Doyle still has the overall lead in the money race, but that wouldn’t matter because Green needs way more to overcome what Doyle has built up.
Doyle has enough money to win this race, he’s moved on to ad development and placement. Your boy, Green, is still raising money to catch up. Doyle’s just at another level.
P.S. You are one of the Three Blind Mice (Sorry, I’m just playing knock knock with you, but I don’t think anyone is at home.)
Just to play devil’s advocate here…. shouldn’t conservatives be worried, if not a bit offended, that Green is spending as much/more than Doyle on his campaign? Whatever happened to budget efficiency and fiscal responsibility?
And furthermore, if Green were to say, “I only spent $641,000…” and he thinks that is a “conservative” amount, then how can he differentiate himself from Doyle? Apparenly Doyle would be acting fiscally conservative as well!
Just a thought
Here’s the headline I saw, in the terrorist-supporting Journal Sentinel no less: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=474650
It reads: Green raises more money than Doyle.
Hey Daniel-san, maybe you should work on your headlines.
The headline you won’t see,
Unless you read A1.
Yes, Ricky and Marino, you are right – the Journal Sentinel wrote the same headline I would have. So I’ll eat crow on that account.
As for Sensible Voter, I will grant you that this was one of my less creative posts in terms of original analysis. You’ll just have to read all the other posts ever written on this blog to see that I am in fact capable of the occassional original thought.
As for carry-over capacity, I would just remind you that Scott Walker tried to make up for Green’s cash advantage in the pseudo-primary by saying that he had all this positive name ID in SE WI, including what he spent on the 2004 Co Exec reelect, and a lot of good that did him.
You’re absolutely right – to outraise Doyle by $60,000 IS laughable. An incumbent who is willing to give away favors and soak special interests on the scale Doyle has been should never get outraised by a challenger.
Why don’t you analyze where Green got all of the PAC money that he transferred to his state account? Don’t you think most of this money came from corporations and trade associations buying access to him in DC?
Face it, boys, people don’t give big bucks to politicians at ANY level of government without obtaining access. You are foolish and naive if you believe otherwise.
Green and Doyle come from similar backgrounds, with professional, college educated parents who were committed to public service. Each candidate has placed a higher priority on public service than on amassing personal weatlh. Each man appears to live a life consistent with his Christian faith.
To imply that one mam is the second coming of Jesus Christ and the other is the devil incarnate is pretty immature thinking.
I’ve not found any Republicans talking about the DUI issue with Peg. It’s actually Democrats who talk about that alot. Last week, a Democrat county treasurer (in a rather large county) committed to me his support of JB, particularly BECAUSE of Peg’s DUI/DWI in a state vehicle. His second objection dealt with state funds litigating non-state issues. If Peg were to win the primary, I think the GOP would have the AG seat in the bag. I don’t think Falk has much support over there.
[...] As was reported earlier this week, challenger Mark Green outraised incumbent Governor Jim Doyle by $60,000 in the first six months of 2006. All three above releases are Democrats bragging about how impressive it is that a challenger outraises an incumbent. So I thought Mark Green should get the same kudoes. [...]