If Republicans breathed a sigh of relief last Friday when Dave Reichert announced he would lead Darcy Burner by about $36,000 in the 3Q money race, they better take a deep breath before reading his actual FEC report. For hidden in his $342,639 of total receipts, is a whopping $47,100 in refunded excess contributions… money he couldn’t legally receive.
Subtract those ill-gotten gains from his contribution totals, and Reichert actually trails Burner for the quarter, $295,539 to $306,784 — and that’s after Reichert’s high-roller funder with President Bush. And again, subtracting the refunds, Reichert only reported $171,134 in individual contributions. So, either our $123,000/3,200 donor netroots fundraiser actually raised more money than the President… or Reichert raised less than $49,000 in individual contributions on his lonesome.
Either way, the President of the United States got his ass kicked by a bunch of bloggers, but rather than acknowledge this simple reality, Reichert chose to cook the books. The bulk of the excess contributions were recorded on 9/30, the last day of the quarter (and then somehow refunded two days earlier.) This is the type of accounting that made Enron famous, allowing Reichert to inflate his quarterly results by simultaneously booking the $47,100 in excess contributions as both a receipt and an expenditure. And since Burner announced her totals early, Reichert’s accountants knew exactly how much they’d have to pad his numbers to convincingly beat her mark.
And for Reichert fans, the news only gets worse. Daniel Kirkdorffer has a thorough breakdown of the two campaigns relative performance, and it presents a stunning contrast:
More impressively, 89% of Burner’s contributions this election cycle came from individuals, while Reichert’s contributions from individuals made up only 57% of his totals, the rest, over $340,000, coming from PACs and campaign committees. Just about half of Burner’s contributions are unitemized, i.e. less than $200 a donation. Only 7% of Reichert’s contributions from individuals are categorized as unitemized. As much as anything that tells so much of the story regarding the breadth of Burner’s support and how much Reichert is having to rely on wealthier donors.
Yeah, you want a really amazing number? Over her two campaign cycles, Burner has raised money from over 22,000 unique contributors — more than some presidential candidates — a donor base she can go back to again and again over the next year. Meanwhile, a sizable chunk of Reichert’s contributions have come from individuals and PACs that have already maxed out. Indeed, unless he turns things around, Reichert faces the very real possibility of recording a quarter-to-quarter decline in cash on hand at the end of the next reporting period.
If the Reichert camp isn’t nervous yet, they better stop believing their own math.
ASSIE Voice: So he had to return the money. Isn’t Darcy Moonbat! receiving the bulk of her money from out-of-district people with mental disorders? Hmmm…?
Just gave Darcy and Bill Sherman another dose of cash! Go Darcy!
Its amazing how many conduits are out there that allow for the ability to cook the books:
http://www.financialpetition.org/
Damn rat bastards!
-Bill
Goldy – If camp Reichert stops believing their math/spin, they will always have “That woman is shrill” to fall back on….sadly for them, it will keep them warm at night.
Great job Goldy and Dan. But the real question here is will the editors and reporters that Reichert played for fools write up the story in a way that makes Reichert pay for this kind of deception?
It is not a matter of partisan politics here and if Burner had lied I would like to see her embarrassed as well. But if this goes unreported or buried in the back of the paper then this goes to the heart of what is wrong with our media today. It is all about winning the headline for the day and the truth be damned.
We can’t ask politicians not to try and spin the truth. That is the nature of the business. But cooking the books to make fools out of the reporters, is really a cheap attempt to make fools out of us all.
Editors and reporters are the ones whose job it is to protect us from this crap. Lets see if they do their jobs.
Investigation?
It seems very few of Darcy’s contributors are from her district. She needs people in the 8th Congressional District willing to vote for her if she hopes to win.
We know there is no shortage of liberal money coming out of Seattle and the rest of the county…but where are her votes going to come from as most of her contributors cannot vote for her unless they plan to move to her district in the next few months.
Even worse than having to give the money back is what Reichet did to the Seahawks. If he didn’t get the lying chimp to come to Bellevue, then Hasselbeck, and Strong would not have been exposed to Bush’s disaster cloud.
Let me explain. Everything that has anything to do with Bush turns out to be a disaster. From all his failed businesses to his war, his economy, and his party.
Everything he comes into contact with turns to sh*t.
The Seahawks were playing fine, and then their quarterback, and fullback met with Bush and the rest is known. Strong is out with a career ending injury, and Hasselbeck probably couldn’t hit his wife with a football…..
Thank You Mr. Reichert for not only spending millions in taxpayer’s money bringing in the lying chimp for your pitiful campaign, but for hurting my Seahawks in the process.
Bush is about as welcome in Washington State as David Duke would be at a NAACP convention…..
Jason, you have been drinking too much kool aid. It is Reichert that is taking most of the pac money. Not Darcy.
There you go again…..
I agree, Reichert has more PAC money. That was not my point and has nothing to do with the fact that most of Darcy’s contributors DO NOT LIVE IN THE DISTRICT!
Since they are not from the district — they cannot vote for her.
Yer right Jason. At least she will have enough cash to debunk the lies about her that the bathroom sex party will be hurling at her.
Why doesn’t Reichert resign like his buddies are doing? He doesn’t stand a chance this cycle. He might as well be lobbying for tasers or something.
How about lobbying for radios so the cops and talk to the firemen? Oops. Maybe not…… Nevermind…..
@7 & @10 And neither can Reichert’s. It is a non-issue. Money does not equal votes no matter where it comes from. It allows/assists the candidate to reach the people that do vote.
The majority of Reichert’s donations are not living in his district. I don’t see you bemoaning that. You are just trying to create a strawman when your candidate is more guilty.
I just read the PI article, and they don’t mention the fact the Reichert will have to give all that money back.
Goldie scooped ’em again!
I could not find anything on the Times website.
Jason @10,
What Michael @12 said. Oh… and… you’re full of shit on the facts.
By my quick count, 96 of Burner’s itemized individual contributions in 3Q came from in district, compared to 118 for Reichert. But since Burner raised half her individual contribution total via several thousand un-itemized (ie, under $200) contributions, it is inconceivable that she hasn’t registered many more in-district donors than Reichert for both the quarter and the cycle.
Bottom line …
Goldy’s spin helps. BUT it would be great to hear more about how the Eastside is “going.” Are there any earlky polls?
@15
Only one that I have heard of and it had Darcy in the lead.
@16
I have heard that as well. Clearly DR has been trying to move himself into the mode Repub image. The danger for DB is that she can be seen as too radical for her District. Also, in a year where most folks will assume a Reprican defeat, the argument that a vote for Reichert is a vote for Bush, may be hollow.
If I were advising DB, I would push her to take advantage of her ealry primary status by highlighting issues that are important on the Estside while liley to be problematic for DR.
Examples:
No Child Left Behind .. what comes next and will it foster the achievement of middle calss kids?
Immigration Reform for tlaneted folks.
Regional Transit … why LR is importnat for the Eastside.
NS highways
Rebuilding relations with Europe, Turkey, etc.
STEM CELLS
SeattleJew – While those are all important issues, one issue will dominate them all: Iraq. Doesn’t matter what district you live, mine – the 8th – or your district. Everything starts with Iraq.
DK
I am not so sure that is true on the Eastside in a Congressional race.
The likely Prexy candidates for both sides are going to propose a phased withdrawal. The difference is likely to be in the spin.
I can see Reichert on board a national campaign that says we have been dumb and now we will be smart and win by withdrawing. Rememeber Nixon?
If DB then takes the extreme postion of Richardson or Kucinich she is toast.
Also the economy, opportunities, immigration, globalism, .. all these are wrapped in a fine external leaf, and the cigar has huge eastside importance on the East side.
One imponderable, what is the woman’s vote likely to be over there? Romney or Guilianio have real problems with the woman’s vote assuming they need to run vs. HRC.
SeattleJew – I used to think Reichert would flip on Iraq, like he has for so many other issues, but I no longer do. He has become entrenched in his support of Bush’s “strategy” and it will be his undoing in the end.
Don’t think that Eastsiders don’t think Iraq is the number on issue. It matters as much to us as it does to Seattleites.
Reichert’s people are just using republican arithmetic, sort of like Jane Hague counting college credits.
David, you need to talk to your new friend Richard Pope on Federal campaign reporting rules. My hunch is campaigns have to report All receipts and disbursments versus Net.
If Reichert had reported net receipts, you would claimed he had committed fraud because he had Not reported the receipt and disbursement of “excess contributions” (your term).
Your statement is correct that you need to look at net numbers for true comparison purposes for fund raising,
@20 Of course Iraq will be an issue but
I do not think a “withdraw now” stance will get votes on the Eastside.
Guiliani or Romney will take a stand of “not losing.” This will NOT inlcude a commitment to Bushian victory. Hillory or Obama will stand for “smart” ending. This will include stabilizing the North, keeping Iran out and some sort of central Iraq strategy. The difference between these policies may be subtle but DR will NOT be backing Bushism.
Imagine, if you want a real fantasy, a Sanchez veep with Romney as Prexy!
Even more heartening than Reichert’s dismal fundraising performance is the national numbers:
“As of the end of August, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had $22.1 million in cash on hand, compared with $1.6 million held by the GOP House committee.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ire16.html
So, at this point in the election cycle, the House Democrats have a 14-to-1 money advantage over the imploding GOPers.
And that’s not all — GOP strategists are beset by a cascade of retirements and quits among their incumbents, whereas the only 2 House Democrats who aren’t seeking re-election are running for Senate seats.
2008 looks like a Blue Year in a big way!
Darcy is the star of the national progressive movement.
DownWithTyranny and the Act Blue people really pushed the donations to offset the Bush visit. I think Firedoglake and Daily Kos were pretty active in it as well.
So I think Jason is not too off base. A lot of those contributions have come, believe it or not, from other states
That being said, I’m stoked to see her kicking Reichart’s ass.
Roger Rodent:
You never did answer my question from before, which I am totally amazed at considering you just love to hear yourself spew. You said you had contributed to Darcy-whats-her name’s campaign fund, and I wanted to know if she accepted your food stamps and/or med coupons as donation? Just curious. I’ll be donating real money to the Reichert campaign myself, as this ditzy woman isn’t qualified to run a McDonald’s, let alone be in D.C.
FSP @ 11, Is that why both Cops and Firefighters continue to Support him over her?
Goldy @ 14, isn’t it also possible that she has been receiving money from contributers who have given the max already then? And by the way, why won’t you comment about the SEEC complaint lodged against your Man Della from those same Fire and Police UNIONS?
Mark, save your money. Give it to someone with a chance of winning. Maybe Orrin Hatch….. Sheriff Hair Spray will just be another case of GOP Roadkill.
Wow, you guys get some feisty trolls around here.
I like the ppatronizing sexism oozing off of #27.
Where can I get a troll like that?
SeattleJew @23, Darcy’s position isn’t a “withdraw now” stance. To quote her:
GO Darcy GO !!!!! She rocks so hard!! I’ll do all I can to help Darcy. Man A real lib. on the east side, oh my god so rad!! I’m a lib. and I love Darcy but I’ve Known Reichert for about 20 years and would never vote for him Darcy or no Darcy.
@23
I do not think a “withdraw now” stance will get votes on the Eastside.
Dan’s criticism of this is very valid, but I also think that as Iraq gets to a certain point (and it’s well on its way there), the folks who want a faster withdrawal as opposed to a more responsible withdrawal will likely be found on both left and right in roughly equal numbers, and possibly moreso on the right. Just because those on the left have opposed this foolish occupation more does not mean that they will be more likely to support a faster withdrawal once the decision to withdrawal is made. In other words, someone who was rash and irresponsible in their opinion of launching this war has a pretty good likelihood of being rash and irresponsible in how they want to end it as well.
This will include stabilizing the North, keeping Iran out and some sort of central Iraq strategy.
At this point, all of these things are teetering on the impossible (as far as what an American administration can do). If we expect either Obama or Clinton to do this, we’re setting them up for failure. The best thing we can hope for is Iraqis can quickly build up the infrastructure to keep foreign interference at a minimum and eventually rebuild the coalition that held the country together as one nation since the early part of the 20th century.
The difference between these policies may be subtle but DR will NOT be backing Bushism.
Remember when we picked the days for when DR would “flip” on Iraq. You had this September. I had April 2008. I’m looking much better than you right now… :)
@30
Wow, you guys get some feisty trolls around here.
I like the ppatronizing sexism oozing off of #27.
Where can I get a troll like that?
Start with the mental hospitals.
Blog Whore Warning!
I wrote about the ‘withdraw now’ issue at my blog.
Seems the Captains don’t want to stay in Iraq, either.
@34 Lee:
Your typical stoner juvenille response. Grow up kid.