Saturday, February 4, 2012

Who is Wall Street's candidate for 2012?

Contrary to what Michael Moore and others would have you believe, most Wall Street donors have picked their candidate and its not President Obama.

Photobucket

Wall Street has thrown its weight behind alum Mitt Romney for president, according to new campaign data for 2011...

No other candidate came close to the $12 million Romney's campaign raised directly in 2011 from individuals who work at financial firms and banks, which also includes cash from insurance and real estate companies, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

By comparison, Obama's campaign raised $5 million from people who worked on Wall Street last year, the Center for Responsive Politics reported.

Need I say more?

Yes, because even this doesn't tell the whole story.

To date, Romney has raised a total of just over $56 million for his campaign this round. Wall Street donations account for 21% of that amount.

In contrast, Obama has raised over $125 million and Wall Street donations account for only 4% of his total.

One other thing to remember is - as the article above indicates - these "Wall Street" donations come from individuals who work in financial firms, banks, real estate and insurance companies. And the most recent data from Open Secrets tells us that 9% of contributions to Romney's campaign came from small donors ($250 or less) where as that number is 47% for the Obama campaign.

Here are the top ten employers of donors to Romney's campaign (with totals):

Goldman Sachs $499,430
JPMorgan Chase & Co $322,400
Morgan Stanley $281,350
Credit Suisse Group $277,250
Citigroup Inc $267,050
Bank of America $213,650
Barclays $207,400
Kirkland & Ellis $206,701
HIG Capital $188,500
PriceWaterhouseCoopers $179,550

And here are the top ten for Obama's campaign (notice not only the lack of Wall Street firms that dominated Romney's list, but the smaller totals/company, indicating a much broader base):

Microsoft Corp $188,643
DLA Piper $151,375
Google Inc $139,030
Morgan & Morgan $127,895
Harvard University $126,962
University of California $125,880
Comcast Corp $114,950
Skadden, Arps et al $100,324
US Dept of State $87,995
Time Warner $80,062

The truth is, President Obama revolutionized presidential campaign finance. Some people were telling that story 3 years ago but now too many have forgotten. He has always relied on millions of people like you and me working together to combat the large contributions of the wealthy few. In other words, he's lived out the old saying about "when everyone does a little, no one has to do a lot."

It seems to be working. So let's all remember that "we're the change we've been waiting for" and do what we can to keep it up!

5 comments:

  1. I donate a small amount to President Obama's campaign each month--in fact, that's what (payroll tax cut) $40 has done for me...I give it to OFA. I get so irritated at having to list my employment information. Being that my field is health care, I know that some low-information oppositon and/ or emoprog will cherry pick that data and turn it into "Obama is beholden to health care/ banking/ union/ etc" because they give him a lot of money. I guess I'm silly to concern myself with that but I've had too many fights with Ron Paul supporters who shout that POTUS gets all of his money from banks. Never seems to penetrate the echo chamber though...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your situation clearly demonstrates the problem.

      Most people don't seem to understand that corporations can't donate directly to campaigns (that's what the Super Pacs are for) and think that when these #'s are broken down by industry that it means the companies are funding the campaigns rather than the people working for them.

      I'll keep doing what I can to get that message out there.

      Delete
  2. More ODS. Saying that Obama is Wall St's best friend is nuts. If he was their best friend, they wouldn't be putting this kind of $$$ against him. Its not like one of the other candidate is lock so you want to brownnose (Nixon vs McCarthy, Bush vs Dukkakis, Clinton vs Dole,...).

    If you don't buy the "they're all racist basterds" argument (I would, but most won't. at least not totally) then they have to think this is in some sense a good investment.

    More nihilistic behaviors from cocktail liberals.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the effect of the President's foreign policy is telling in the fact that employees of the State Department are one of his largest contributors. Especially since his focus on diplomacy rather than war elevates the State Department of the Defense Department.

    ReplyDelete
  4. While I appreciate that Obama has perfected it, I think it is unfair to say that he "revolutionized" campaign donations by relying so much on small donors. Howard Dean was the real revolutionary in that matter. Obama just recognized the strength of Dean's system and improved on it.

    Obama's the man, but Dean was the man before him.

    ReplyDelete