WashPost's Chris Cillizza Takes It Upon Himself to Defend Obama's 160 Fundraisers Thus Far This Election Cycle
Sure President Obama has been on a huge fundraising kick lately. And yes, he's clocked 160 fundraisers thus far in the reelection season, "more than double the 79 events that President George W. Bush had held by this time in the 2004 presidential race," the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza confessed today in his 11-paragraph page A6 article. [The print article was a condensed and updated version of a June 12 The Fix blog post that you can find here.]
To make a big deal out of this would just be silly, Cillizza insisted, taking it upon himself to spin for the Obama White House against Republican charges that the president is more interested in beefing up his campaign war chest than he is in governing.
"[C]omparing the amount Bush raised -- or how many events he held to raise it -- to what Obama is doing is misleading," Cillizza complained. "Remember that while Bush raised and spent north of $270 million during the primary season... he accepted public financing for the two-plus months between, roughly, Labor Day and Election Day," Cillizza added, noted that, "Obama on the other hand, opted out of public financing for the general election in 2008."
While that's true, Cillizza omitted that Obama broke a campaign pledge to use public financing if his Republican opponent chose to do so. Sen. John McCain, long a proponent of liberal-friendly campaign finance reforms, elected to use public financing.
"[T]rying to base political attacks on how much money the other guy (or gal) is raising and spending rarely works," Cillizza concluded, adding that "[p]ersuadable voters -- unaffiliated and independents -- don't follow politics closely enough to be very interested in who raised what from whom."
That may very well be true, but it cuts against the liberal media's larger narrative that independent voters are turned off by massive amounts of money -- particularly Super PAC money -- in politics. It's amusing to see folks like Cillizza argue that massive mega-bucks fundraising doesn't matter as a campaign issue... when it's Democrats who are doing it.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
160 fundraisers? Whew!
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 5:41pm.
When does he get time to squeeze in some presidenting?
Presidenting??
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 8:36pm.
Hell, it's all he can do to manage an occasional round of golf!
presidenting
Submitted by CarlosS on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 6:03pm.
Give Obama a break, he had to spend the whole, entire day presidenting that day Tom Barrett asked him to go over to Wisconsin for a little campaigning. /sarc off
Of course it is
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 6:28pm.
"Comparing the amount Bush raised -- or how many events he held to raise it -- to what Obama is doing is misleading."
Of course it's misleading. The two situations are no where near being similar!
Unlike Obama, Bush was running for reele... opps. Never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush enjoyed a non-partisan Congr... opps. Never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush's economy was in a jobless recov... opps. Never mind
Unlike Obama, Bush had troops in Afgain... opps, Never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush still had troops in Ira... opps, Never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush had kept his promise to close Gitm... opps, Never mind
Unlike Obama, Bush had to face turmoils in the Middle Ea... opps, Never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush was facing huge opposition from Russia over the missile shie... opps, never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush had to deal with questions about leaks of confidential inform... opps, never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush was accused of running record defici... opps, never mind.
Unlike Obama, Bush was plagued by scandl... opps Never mind.
Hay, wait a minute! The two situations are almost exactly the same! The only difference I can see, other than the media support Obama is enjoying, support that Bush never had, is that, unlike Obama, Bush didn't need so many fundraisers in which to find financial support for his campaign.
"Obama on the other hand, opted out of public financing for the general election in 2008."
There! Finally! A difference! The money Obama raised in his first Presidential campaign is no way similar to the money Bush raised in his REELECTION campaign! Of course comparing Obama''s first election with Bush's second election is actually what is misleading, but at least something is misleading, right?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Chris
Submitted by bobsmom on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 6:16pm.
is hoping for a spot on the Olympic Obama Knob Gobbling Team this summer. And folks, I think he has a shot.
NO WORRIES
Submitted by ferv888 on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 6:38pm.
Hey Chris, not to worry, Obama will quit going to NY to take money from those dasterdly Wall Street boys, they are giving to Romney this year. Why do you think that business community is giving up on this libtard????? When Romney wins, and the business commmunity gets off the 2T in cash, look out!
Chris crisis
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 6:52pm.
Have you noticed a plethora of Big Chrises in the MSM-SUM: Hayes, Cellizza, and Wide Mouth Frog?
Well sure it was Bush's fault and
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 06/13/2012 - 10:05pm.
it could have been 165.