Clinton in Financial Trouble?

[RunInRed 16,488]

The Clinton campaign just announced that Hillary and Bill Clinton injected $5 million of their personal fortune into her campaign a few days ago. This comes on the heals of Obama announcing he raised $32M in January compared to Clinton's $13M.

In response, the Obama campaign has announced they have raised from donors $4.2M since the results came in last night and they are challenging their supporters to match the $5M which they are on track to do in 1 day!

WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton lent her campaign $5 million in January to keep up the pace with Barack Obama, who has outraised and outspent the New York senator in the Democratic presidential race.

“The loan illustrates Senator Clinton’s commitment to this effort and to ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win across this nation,” said Howard Wolfson, communications director for the Clinton campaign.

Wolfson told FOX News on Thursday that senior staff in the campaign, including campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, have also been working without pay in February and will continue to do so throughout the month to help the campaign economize.

Wolfson said several unnamed senior staff members initiated the move, and those affected will go without salary in February.

The Clinton camp had deflected questions about any self-funding from the senator until after Super Tuesday. On Wednesday, the Clinton campaign set a new goal of raising $3 million over the next three days through the Internet. Mark Penn, senior Clinton adviser, said the campaign was on a record-setting pace of online donations on Wednesday.

“We have had one of our best fundraising efforts ever on the Web today and our Super Tuesday victories will only help in bringing more support for her candidacy,” Wolfson said.

“We will have funds to compete,” Penn said, “but we’re likely to be outspent again.”

It’s the first personal loan Clinton has given her campaign and aides say they hope it will be the last as they seek online donations after scoring victories in California, New Jersey and Massachusetts.

Clinton’s loan marks a significant financial watershed for a campaign once thought inevitable.

Chief rival Barack Obama has raised more than $132 million for the campaign, about $20 million more than Clinton. Obama has not donated any personal money to his campaign and, unlike Clinton, has not accepted donations from corporate special interest political funds.

Fund-raising will be crucial to Clinton as she enters a new phase in the campaign where she must try to compete with Obama’s superior war chest and matching ability to score pledged delegates for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Obama, riding a wave of fundraising both from large donors and small Internet contributors, collected a stunning $32 million in January. Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe said the Clinton campaign raised only $13.5 million for the month. The $5 million was in addition to that amount, Wolfson said.

Clinton aides hope the loan will demonstrate Clinton’s commitment to her campaign and ellicit new donations from those who sympathize with Clinton’s fund-raising plight.

Hillary and Bill Clintons’ financial disclosures, which reveal only broad ranges of assets, place their wealth between $10 million to $50 million. The Clintons made millions after leaving the White House in part through book advances and Bill Clinton’s large speaking fees.

Clinton’s name recognition and lead in polls in some of the bigger upcoming states give her an advantage and Obama’s higher spending rate did not translate into victories in several states Tuesday.

But the terrain ahead features contests in the short term that are favorable to Obama. On Saturday, Obama and Clinton will compete in contests in Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington. On Tuesday, Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia hold primaries.

The Clinton camp is counting on March 4 match-ups in Ohio and Texas and an April 22 primary in Pennsylvania to even out Obama’s advantages. But all three are expensive states in which to campaign.

Obama’s camp signaled that he was ready to invest money in those states as well. “We think we’re in strong financial position so if we choose to do so in the later states we’ll have the ability to do that,” campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters Wednesday.

Clinton spent $15 million in December going into the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. Her campaign spent at least $9 million in the last two weeks of January advertising in Super Tuesday states. Obama spent about $11 million in Super Tuesday advertising.

Clinton raised $23.7 million in the last quarter of 2007 for the primary elections compared to Obama’s $22 million. Both had about $18.5 million cash on hand for the primaries going into January. But Obama roared to a fundraising lead in January by collecting money at the rate of at least $1 million a day and attracting more than 170,000 new donors.

The need to lend the campaign money exposes Clinton’s inability to raise money from new donors as fast or in increments as large as Obama’s.

Obama has raised more money from small donations than Clinton. An analysis by the Campaign Finance Institute, which tracks trends in political money, found that Obama raised about a third of his money in 2007 from donors who gave $200 or less. Only one-third of his money came from donors who have given the legal maximum of $2,300, compared to Clinton who raised about half of her money from “maxed out” donors and only 14 percent from donors of $200 or less.

[otterinbham 0]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

[RunInRed 16,488]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Spending $5M for a job that only pays 400k/yr. Tells you all you need to know.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Spending $5M for a job that only pays 400k/yr. Tells you all you need to know.

They expect to get back every penny.

[otterinbham 0]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Spending $5M for a job that only pays 400k/yr. Tells you all you need to know.

They expect to get back every penny.

Yeah, but how did they accumulate all that swag in the first place? Most wealthy people I know don't keep the cash in a checking account. It's tied up in real estate, equities, and other prudent investments. It's not exactly easy to cash out on all that stuff in short order.

[RunInRed 16,488]

Obama is a money machine...7M since the polls closed on Super Tuesday - unbelievable.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/p...hamfelsen/CGGpp

[Tigermike 3,054]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Actually just last week I gave you all a heads up on that very question.

Link to the answer of your question.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Spending $5M for a job that only pays 400k/yr. Tells you all you need to know.

They expect to get back every penny.

Yeah, but how did they accumulate all that swag in the first place? Most wealthy people I know don't keep the cash in a checking account. It's tied up in real estate, equities, and other prudent investments. It's not exactly easy to cash out on all that stuff in short order.

Clinton has made a ton of money in speaking fees and book deals-- I've heard upwards to $40mil.

[otterinbham 0]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Spending $5M for a job that only pays 400k/yr. Tells you all you need to know.

They expect to get back every penny.

Yeah, but how did they accumulate all that swag in the first place? Most wealthy people I know don't keep the cash in a checking account. It's tied up in real estate, equities, and other prudent investments. It's not exactly easy to cash out on all that stuff in short order.

Clinton has made a ton of money in speaking fees and book deals-- I've heard upwards to $40mil.

Damn. I wish I were paid that much to speak and write. The most I ever got for a speaker's fee was a thousand bucks.

[RunInRed 16,488]

You know, LBJ spent his entire life on the public payroll. He never had a private sector job. Yet, when he left the presidency, he was worth about $80 million in 1968 dollars--the equivalent of about $208 million today.

Although Hillary did work for a private law firm for a few years, the Clinton family spent almost their entire life in the public sector. How the heck do they have $5 million in spare cash lying around? I know they made a few mill on the book deals and speaking engagements, but that's still a heck of a lot of liquidity.

Actually just last week I gave you all a heads up on that very question.

Link to the answer of your question.

I do not think you can use foundational funds in that manner - I seriously doubt that is the source of these funds...for if it was, this might be a bigger story than you ever dreamed. Even the Clinton's aren't that stupid.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions from George Soros?

[RunInRed 16,488]

Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions from George Soros?

Please explain (credibly references would be appreciated) how Obama is receiving "$$$$$$$ millions from George Soros?" Obama has by far the biggest grassroots movement from small donors of any candidate any either party. Sure non-profit 501 groups have endorsed him but that happens on both sides as we saw with the Swift Boat Vetarans in '04.

[RunInRed 16,488]

Obama on pace to raise $30M more in February:

Politico

"Obama on pace to raise $30 mil in February"

Barack Obama’s campaign is on track to raise another $30 million in February, sources close to the Illinois senator say, while Hillary Rodham Clinton’s spokesman revealed Wednesday that she had loaned her campaign $5 million.

Insiders in both campaigns say the growing financial disparity virtually ensures that Obama will be able to significantly outspend Clinton in the critical primaries to come.

Even before all the Super Tuesday votes were counted, Obama began airing advertisements in Nebraska, Virginia, the District of Columbia, Maryland and Maine — the next round of primary and caucus states — before Clinton did.

His campaign has raised $2.2 million in less than 24 hours, sources say. (that number is over 7.5M now)

“Obama’s financial superiority is straining the Clinton campaign at this point..."

The continuing infusion of cash will allow Obama to remain a step ahead of Clinton as the primary map shifts to states where he has some built-in advantages and more time to interact with voters who are less familiar with him than with the New York senator.

...an extraordinary February seems less far-fetched coming on the heels of a stunning January.

The Obama camp reported last week that it raised $32 million last month. The Clinton campaign reported raising $14 million, and it is unclear if that includes the Clintons’ personal loan.

And, according to the Obama campaign, only 3 percent of his donors have given the maximum $2,300 donation for the primary.

...Indeed, the strength of the Obama fundraising machine from the outset was based on its unusual recruitment and reliance on small donors.

... In contrast, Clinton raised about half of her money from donors who gave the maximum.

More striking, the report found that nearly half of Obama’s individual contributors in the fourth quarter of 2007 gave donations of $200 or less — amounts so small that the Federal Election Commission doesn’t even demand the givers be named on disclosure reports.

According to the campaign, that pattern continued in January. Of the thousands of Internet donations Obama received, 90 percent amounted to less than $100 each. Ten thousand people gave between $5 and $10.

...The infusion of money “is testament to the grass-roots support we have from all over the country and shows a financial sustainability that the other campaigns don’t appear to have,” said Burton.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions from George Soros?

Please explain (credibly references would be appreciated) how Obama is receiving "$$$$$$$ millions from George Soros?" Obama has by far the biggest grassroots movement from small donors of any candidate any either party. Sure non-profit 501 groups have endorsed him but that happens on both sides as we saw with the Swift Boat Vetarans in '04.

You actually act surprised that someone, anyone could make a connection with Soros & Obama? Maybe you should read something other than the Obama releases.

Take a look at these then if you want give Google a shot.

Soros, Obama, and the Millionaires Exception

Normally individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but when candidates are running against millionaires, these limits are lifted and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not include money that Soros was able to funnel to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros was able to raise from tapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/sor...millionair.html

Obama Meets Party Donors in New York

Amid intensifying presidential musings by Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama met with George Soros, the liberal billionaire philanthropist, then some other donors last night at Mr. Soros’s offices. Afterward he spoke at a charity event that was to be followed by a news conference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/05/us/polit...agewanted=print

Unlike Kerry, Obama Covets Soros' Support

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articl...28/164147.shtml

George Soros Backs Obama

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/...edges-his-bets/

A FAN OBAMA DOESN'T NEED

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02022007/gossi...ed_pagesix_.htm

The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power

Acciracu in Media

BTW - You have posted several articles about all the money Obama has been raising lately. It's also interesting that Soros have been funding leftist blogs and hate sites for years. A great grassroots money machine don't you think? It's no surprise that MoveOn (Soros) Endorses Obama is it?

GOOGLE: obama and soros

[RunInRed 16,488]

Didn't see anything in that where Soros has given "millions" . Soros backs Obama - so what? There are not wealthy donors who back Repubs?

If you want to bitch about 527s...then talk about campaign finance reform (which Obama has strongly favored) but to suggest (as you have) that Soros is cutting checks worth millions directly to any candidate is a flat out lie.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Didn't see anything in that where Soros has given "millions" . Soros backs Obama - so what? There are not wealthy donors who back Repubs?

If you want to bitch about 527s...then talk about campaign finance reform (which Obama has strongly favored) but to suggest (as you have) that Soros is cutting checks worth millions directly to any candidate is a flat out lie.

I didn't say directly to any candidate did I? For you to suggest that Soros is not funneling $$$$$$$ millions to Obama through "grassroots organizations is not just disingenuous, but laughable.

What I said was "Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions from George Soros?"

Maybe I could have said Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions funneled from George Soros's grassroots organizations? Would that have made it easier for you?

And you still haven't answered my question, which is: Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions funneled from George Soros's grassroots organizations? Would that have made it easier for you?

[RunInRed 16,488]

My answer is that it's disingenious to isolate Obama in your complaint about wealthy donors contributing to 527s. Why don't you use your googling skills and research where it's happening on the right as well.

[Tigermike 3,054]

My answer is that it's disingenious to isolate Obama in your complaint about wealthy donors contributing to 527s. Why don't you use your googling skills and research where it's happening on the right as well.

This thread is about Hillary's financial trouble. Are you trying to hijack your own thread just to keep from answering the question about the one you admire?

Let me make this very simple for you. You titled the thread "Clinton in Financial Trouble?, Injects $5M of her own money into campaign"

I asked a question.

Which is the bigger problem do you think, Hillary using her own money or Obama receiving $$$$$ millions from George Soros?

And this is your answer?

My answer is that it's disingenious to isolate Obama in your complaint about wealthy donors contributing to 527s. Why don't you use your googling skills and research where it's happening on the right as well.

The absolutely only thing disingenuous in this thread is your making excuses and not answering the question.

We all know you have a deep crush on Obama, but just step back for a moment and answer the question. The question was for you and obviously you don't want to answer or you wouldn't be resorting to wholesale rationalization, projection and circular reasoning. BTW throwing out these red herrings in no way answers the question.

Or maybe you did answer the question. You don't care where Obama gets the money or from who, as long as he gets it and you are thrilled that Hillary has used her own $$$$$$$$ millions. Is that what you are saying?

BTW - Hillary using her own $$$$$$ millions $$$$$$ opens up the door for Soros to give even more than he already has.

Soros, Obama, and the Millionaires Exception

Normally individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but when candidates are running against millionaires, these limits are lifted and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not include money that Soros was able to funnel to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros was able to raise from tapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/sor...millionair.html

Now that should make you very happy.

[RunInRed 16,488]

I don't really care what Hillary does in regards to beefing her own war chest. It's only relevant in the context of the larger picture of the Democratic race and it's very telling IMO.

I don't think Soros is giving Obama millions. Nothing I've seen supports the argument you want to advance. Individuals are capped at $2,300. Is he giving to 527s? Sure, he always has and I imagine he will continue. But that is nothing special or isolated to Obama - he did it prior to Obama's emergence on the national landscape and imagine he will continue to afterwards. So again, the real issue it seems you are complaining about is campaign finance reform...and I'm in agreement - I'd like to see all of the money taken out of the proces but that is just not the reality of the current state.

[Tigermike 3,054]

I don't really care what Hillary does in regards to beefing her own war chest. It's only relevant in the context of the larger picture of the Democratic race and it's very telling IMO.

I don't think Soros is giving Obama millions. Nothing I've seen supports the argument you want to advance. Individuals are capped at $2,300.

Read it slow,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, real slow.

Normally individuals are limited to giving $2300 to candidates in federal elections, but when candidates are running against millionaires, these limits are lifted and candidates are allowed to receive up to $12,000 from a single individual. Soros and his family gave Barack Obama $60,000. This does not include money that Soros was able to funnel to so-called 527 groups (Moveon.org, for example) that have also been politically active; nor does it include money that Soros was able to raise from tapping a network of friends, business associates, and employees.

[RunInRed 16,488]

Even if it is 12k...that's hardly millions. And further, are you really chiding Soros for encouraging/rallying his family/friends to contribute to a candidate/cause he believes in?

Your compaint is about campaign finance reform whether you realize it or not.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Even if it is 12k...that's hardly millions. And further, are you really chiding Soros for encouraging/rallying his family/friends to contribute to a candidate/cause he believes in?

Your compaint is about campaign finance reform whether you realize it or not.

You still haven't answered the question whether you realize it or not.

[RunInRed 16,488]

I've answered your question in three separate posts now, end of discussion.

[Tigermike 3,054]

I've answered your question in three separate posts now, end of discussion.

Actually I answered the question.

Or maybe you did answer the question. You don't care where Obama gets the money or from who, as long as he gets it and you are thrilled that Hillary has used her own $$$$$$$$ millions. Is that what you are saying?

[RunInRed 16,488]

Family's Wealth Draws Attention

Clinton Spokesman Says Senator's Cash Was Tapped for Loan

By BRODY MULLINS and JOHN R. EMSHWILLER

February 8, 2008

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's decision to use $5 million of her own money to finance her presidential campaign casts a new spotlight on the wealth that she and her husband have accumulated since they left the White House seven years ago.

The Clintons were jointly worth between $10 million and $50 million as of last April, the most recent figures publicly available, according to government financial-disclosure forms. Those forms only require candidates to provide a range of the value of their assets, and not a specific figure.

Campaign-finance laws allow a political candidate to spend up to half of funds held with a spouse. That would give Sen. Clinton access to a total of between $5 million and $25 million for her presidential bid, unless the couple's finances markedly changed during the past nine months.

Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson suggested the loan the candidate gave her campaign came solely from her earnings, not from her husband's. In addition to her Senate salary, Sen. Clinton has earned "in excess" of $9 million from her 2003 best-selling book, "Living History." "She is not presently contemplating a future loan," he said.

But she does have access to half her husband's earnings placed in joint financial accounts. Since leaving the presidency, Bill Clinton has made tens of millions of dollars through speaking fees and business deals.

Mr. Clinton is negotiating to sever his high-profile business ties with Los Angeles businessman Ron Burkle, who is also a major fund-raiser for Sen. Clinton. That deal could soon provide an additional $20 million or more to the Clinton family coffers -- potentially increasing Sen. Clinton's personal access to cash by about $10 million in her expensive battle against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

The Obama campaign was quick to blur the distinction between his and hers concerning cash. The Illinois senator's campaign manager, David Plouffe, sent an email to supporters shortly after the loan was disclosed Wednesday with the subject line "Startling news." "The Clinton campaign just announced that Hillary and Bill Clinton injected $5 million of their personal fortune into her campaign a few days ago," the message said, including a fund-raising plea to match -- and exceed -- the figure.

Mr. Obama also used the loan to jab Sen. Clinton about not making public her tax returns -- something he has done. In comments to reporters, Mr. Obama said voters deserve to know where candidates get their income. Mr. Wolfson said Sen. Clinton "discloses the source of her income every year," through her annual Senate financial-disclosure forms, though they are less detailed than income-tax returns.

Sen. Clinton isn't the only presidential candidate to use personal funds to aid a White House bid. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney spent approximately $40 million during the past year on his failed attempt to win this year's Republican nomination, which he ended yesterday.

In 2003, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry loaned his campaign $6.4 million by refinancing a home he held in a trust with his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, a billionaire from a previous marriage. Once Mr. Kerry had sealed up his party's nomination, he repaid the loan with campaign funds.

The exact nature and size of the Clinton family wealth has gotten increased attention in recent weeks, as Mr. Clinton has, as reported, sought to unwind his financial ties to Mr. Burkle. The potential $20 million payout stems from his six-year business relationship with the Yucaipa Cos., which is headed by his longtime friend Mr. Burkle, according to people familiar with the matter.

A major part of those talks involves settling on a final payout number for Mr. Clinton. Mr. Clinton's relationship with Yucaipa began in early 2002 when he signed on as a senior adviser to the West Hollywood, Calif., firm that operates a number of investment funds. Mr. Clinton has a profit participation in two big Yucaipa domestic investment funds. His potential payday from those two funds went up markedly in the last six months thanks to hundreds of millions of dollars in profits the two funds reaped from the sale of two big supermarket chains, according to people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Clinton is also a partner in a Yucaipa global investment fund that focuses on investing in foreign companies. Mr. Clinton is one of three owners of the general partner of that fund, along with Mr. Burkle, who is the managing partner, and an entity connected to Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai.

Mr. Wolfson declined to discuss the relationship between Mr. Clinton's businesses and Sen. Clinton's campaign finances, saying that she didn't intend to use any more of her family funds. "Unless and until that changes," he said, such questions "are purely hypothetical."