Talk:Fundraising for the 2008 United States presidential election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

United States: Presidential elections Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).

initial remarlks

This page is obviously misleading. "Money raised" means the money that each presidential candidate actually raised during that quarter from contributors. It should not include money that they gave to themselves, in the form of transfers from other funds or from personal accounts. There should be another category for money not actually raised by contributors during a quarter, perhaps entitled "Money transferred." We could have three categories, "Money Raised," "Money Transferred" and "Total Reported", or we could simply have two categories entitled "Money Raised" and "Total Reported." Either change improves the article, and this article is far too misleading if left unchanged.

From CNN (and in line with what can be found everywhere as reported by the Clinton campaign):

"Clinton raised $19 million from contributors in the first three months of the year, compared with $24.8 million for Obama. But with $7 million earmarked for a possible general-election race and another $10 million transferred from her Senate campaign chest, the New York senator topped her Illinois rival by about $11 million."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/29/2008.hopefuls.cash/index.html?iref=newssearch

Thus, Clinton's "Money raised" for the first quarter was $19 million, significantly less than Obama's.

Similarly, in the second quarter, Mitt Romney had to transfer $6.5 million of his own money to beat out Rudy Giuliani. Romney raised $14 million versus Giuliani's $17 million, but with $6.5 million Romney transferred from his own personal bank account, Romney's total reaches $21.5 million, technically beating out Giuliani.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/03/gop.fundraising/index.html?iref=newssearch

Also, the totals for the second quarter have been reported for most of the candidates, including all of the so-called "Top Tier" candidates. Thus, this page needs to be updated to show the second quarter totals for the candidates.

If this page is going to exist for the next year and a half, it ought to be well-kept.

BareAss 18:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will update this page as per (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/16/clinton-obama-edwards-bank-almost-100-million/#more-862) as soon as I have the time to make it pretty.BareAss 14:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add Ron Paul's data for the last quarter please?--74.65.242.229 (talk) 22:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moneybomb

After some discussion at Moneybomb, I considered it may be appropriate to move a table of moneybombs to a section of this page rather than to keep it at that article. Since it seems relatively quiet here, I might do that soon if it works out over there and I don't hear anything else. John J. Bulten 23:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4th quarter

to the authors: please update the 4th quarter section! sincerly, don —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.94.249 (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding Bias

This article should be strictly data (fundraising numbers), or numbers and analysis of fundraising for all candidates. I am removing the paragraph promoting Ron Paul's fundraising. It clearly lends some bias to the article because it is the only paragraph about a candidate's fundraising techniques. It is also completely uncited. It may be appropriate to include discussion about all of the candidates fundraising, but focusing so much on one (including using a graph of his fundraising) reeks of non-neutrality in the article. In the mean time, this tidbit belongs in Ron Paul's article, not here. Tyro (talk) 09:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

deleted bias INFORMATION 2 sentences of basic information about the significant fund raising record on the 5th of November left... BIAS txt has been taken out... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.208.33 (talk) 00:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trying not to slip into an edit war

I continue to believe that the Ron Paul paragraph is out of place and pushes a non-neutral point of view into this article. The section is completely unreferenced and has been re-added several times by 69.122.208.33, who has not discussed the repeated reverts here. For the time being, I have tagged the section with my neutrality concerns, and will avoid further reverts in the hope reaching an agreement on this discussion page.

I believe the appropriate place for this information is here [1] in the Ron Paul article, just as each candidate's article has relevant information about notable fundraising achievements and events during their campaigns (such as Barack Obama [2], John McCain [3], Hillary Clinton [4], or Mitt Romney [5]). In addition to the text, the article also has two graphs currently showing fundraising trends for Ron Paul and Mike Gravel. I feel these graphs also push a point of view in the article because graphs are not included for all candidates. These graphs also belong best in each campaign's fundraising section.

Given the more broad subject of this article, I believe that we should include a general overview with topics like "more money raised this year than ever before etc. etc." or discuss general fundraising trends as they apply to the entire election. I propose a general guideline for this article: information should be provided equally for all candidates unless it is not available, and we should not introduce partial coverage at all. Tyro (talk) 23:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed section without sources

The below section on fundraising has been removed from the article, for lack of sources substantiating the activity claimed, and sources stating what previous records are. Sources required to stay in the article. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One Day Fund Raising Record
- On November 5, 2007, the Ron Paul campaign raised over $4.3 million. That amount is the largest amount collected on a single day by any Republican candidate, and the record for largest amount of on-line fund raising in a single day ever in U.S. history. Ron Paul then beat his own record on December 16, 2007 by raising over $6.03 million in 24 hours, the most ever raised in one day by any candidate for president in U.S. history.

New tables

I put in a new section for the overall election summary, and sorted the Q4 tables by receipts before loans (it seemed like a better measure). Most importantly, I made the tables sortable! To clean them up, I removed the dollar signs in every field. I think we should go back and clean up the tables for the old quarters, but that will take a lot of time. Tyro (talk) 07:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think I am going to try and redo the Q4 tables to list the following things (Q4 values only): Contributions, Loans, Total Receipts, Disbursements, Cash on Hand, Debt, CoH minus Debt. Thoughts? Tyro (talk) 07:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Gravel

Gravel is still in the race, but is not mentioned in the newest updates. Fix this, please. 71.255.193.128 (talk) 04:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Post-Election Updating

This page still marks some candidates as "having withdrawn/suspended their presidential bid". This to me seems redundant since this election is now over. Any objections to removing the "withdrawn/suspended" classification on this article? Fleerz (talk) 00:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's referring to the particular quarter. If not, this would make the most sense. --William S. Saturn (talk) 00:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, this does not refer to each particular quarter. Notice that the 4th Quater 2007 section shows all candidates other than Barack Obama having withdrawn their bids. Fleerz (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Average spent per vote

Where do those "average spent per vote" figures come from? They aren't consistent with the other numbers in the table... --Tango (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Fundraising for the 2008 United States presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]