Sarah Palin Lags in 2012 Fundraising Primary

April 19, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (8)

By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

The latest campaign finance numbers coming various maybe-presidential candidates has produced more data points to support the theory that Sarah Palin is less interested in being a presidential candidate than in being a political celebrity. Politico reported last week that Palin's Sarah PAC raised less than those of some of her possible rivals for the 2012 GOP nomination. Palin's roughly $400,000 raised lagged behind potential rivals Tim Pawlenty ($567,000, according to the PAC's FEC filing) and Mitt Romney ($1.624 million, according to the FEC report, including an impressive $950,000 in March alone). All three were ahead of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee ($278,000 for the first quarter) and were dwarfed by Newt Gingrich, who raised $2.7 million for his 527 committee, which is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison because it operates under different fundraising rules.

I thought the key bit from last week's Politico report was the notation that "unlike Pawlenty and Romney, Palin has done very little to add to her campaign fund," instead focusing on paid speeches and her Fox News and Discovery Channel gigs, not to mention stumping for favored candidates. That plays into the notion that she's more interested in promoting the Palin image than preparing a Palin candidacy.

Which brings us to today's report from Politics Daily which notes that Palin gave precisely no money to candidates in the 20 House races she unveiled as targets (complete with bulls-eyes) on her Facebook page last month. That announcement, of course, invited supporters to visit SarahPac.com and "join me in the fight." The implicit message being: Give me money so I can spend it on getting our candidates elected in these key races. One would think that in order to kick-start her targeting drive she might have sent a few bucks into those districts. It will be interesting to see if she eventually does (and how much).

Overall this year, Sarah PAC has spent $402,000, of which a cool $9,500 has gone to GOP candidates (that's less, Politics Daily notes, than was spent on a single photographer, who earned $11,596). Let's be clear: This sort of fundraising bait and switch is not unique to Palin, but rather is part of the leadership PAC game. Romney's Free and Strong America PAC which has spent $1.28 million this year, of which a bit more than $52,000 went to other candidates and committees; Pawlenty's Freedom First PAC spent upwards of $540,000 of which a hair under $27,000 went to other candidates and PACs; and Huckabee's Huck PAC spent $232,000 while contributing $13,500.

So if one wanted to take a crude measure, around 5.8 percent of Huckabee's spending has gone to candidates, committees and PACs, as compared to about 5 percent of Pawlenty's, 4 percent of Romney's and 2.3 percent of Palin's. But until year's end, when we can look at the final tally for each candidate, the numbers are not only crude but arguably misleading.

Then there's Newt. His American Solutions for Winning the Future comes under section 527 of the tax code, which separates it from the leadership PACs mentioned above in two important ways: First it can raise sums in unlimited amounts and from any source (PACs are confined to $5,000 per person and can't take money at all from corporations and unions) and second it is barred from making political donations. But Politico reports that the group has pulled in $2.7 million this year, which trumps the combined total of the rest of the field.

The full article is worth a read as it describes how Gingrich has used American Solutions to build a "robust political operation." My favorite part, though, is American Solutions COO Dan Varroney "rejecting the premise that American Solutions is geared towards positioning Gingrich for a 2012 presidential run. 'Not at all,' he said. 'Our focus is clear cut: to save America."

Oh that. In case you missed the point, GOP 12 points out, Gingrich has a new book coming called (and really, this isn't from the Onion), To Save America: Stopping Obama's Secular-Socialist Machine. Ah how times change. I remember when Newt's literary mission was merely To Renew America.

Tags:
Mike Huckabee,
Tim Pawlenty,
Newt Gingrich,
Sarah Palin,
Mitt Romney

Reader Comments Read all comments (8)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Palin in 2012

Everyone knows that Obama hats America and isn't even Christian. Sara is just trying to stop all the socialism that is going on and has gone way too far. Why don't liberals just learn that real christians don't run.

_____________

1. Obama does not hate (or Hats) America.

2. Obama is a Christian.

3. What socialism? Please tell me because I can't find any socialism in America. Do you even know what socialism is?

And knucklehead not ever one in America is a Christian.

America is NOT a Christian Nation!

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

Natasha Williams of TX 11:42AM June 09, 2010

We cannot have a true Democracy when our Government is in competition with it self,(A house Divided....) We must learn to operate as a people and not as separate parties.

A few very powerful rich who are very manipulative have much to lose and love the power that they have and attribute that power to there money and there manipulative powers.

The republicans say "let to big to fail, fail", I Agree, Nevertheless they may be saying that because they believe that is what the people want to here and the people would be to afraid to follow through with that advice Because it would cost us those jobs.

A democracy requires participation by the people otherwise all we have is more dictators

We need a new active party for the people by the people and we need to be in every city counsel meetings, Town halls and have our own website and radio shows, we need to have regular reports from the white house and local government. We need to keep our think tank groups small and come together regularly. we need to be up on all issues without excuse

excuses allow one to ignore the problem and prevents the solution.

Don D. Brock of AZ 11:21AM April 20, 2010

Everyone knows that Obama hats America and isn't even Christian. Sara is just trying to stop all the socialism that is going on and has gone way too far. Why don't liberals just learn that real christians don't run.

Number one Republican of GA 9:53AM April 20, 2010

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News and World Report, overseeing all opinion editorial content. He is the author of "White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters." E-mail him at rschlesinger@usnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @rschles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement