Friday, July 14th, 2006...7:03 am
Are There Junkets Available?
There has been a great deal of criticism of Rip Wilson’s donation to Gabrielle Giffords. Yeah, I’ll admit, I don’t like most of his clients. I don’t like the fact that this guy lobbies for Clear Channel Outdoor, but I’ve actually lobbied Giffords on billboard issues and I can’t think of a time she has voted with those bozos. Interestingly, he also lobbies for the American Diabetes Association.
I’m not sure how $600 out of whatever fraction of a million dollars will be announced today is supposed to determine her entire political career, but hey, whatever works.
I went ahead and checked the list of his clients, and I caught one that I haven’t heard Patty Weiss or Jeff Latas go after. Right there, #2 on the list: American Association for Nude Recreation.
So, what was the quid pro quo on that one? The people have a right to know.
31 Comments
July 14th, 2006 at 7:46 am
I was hoping someone would post a thread for discussing today’s fundraising disclosures.
I would hope Giffords cracks $250 K. I think cracking $300 K again is likely too much to expect in the third quarter.
For Patty’s second quarter, I hope she cracks $200 K, which would be a small increase in what she did her first quarter. At least match what she did her first quarter.
I hate to say it, but I think Latas needs at least $125 K this quarter to remain credible. If not, he gets fully demoted to being an issue-raiser but not a serious candidate for winning. Which isn’t to say it’s not an important role, it’s why Francine and Alex are still in the race.
July 14th, 2006 at 8:50 am
I also checked into Wilson thing, since it appears to be one of the few FACTS being cited.
This guy contributes to lots of candidates, almost all of the donations in the $150 to $400 range. He spreads it around.
He also works for lots of causes, naturally some we might agree with and some we do not.
Bloggers have screamed the high heavens on this and SB1065, and now it’s front page of the Tucson section of today’s Star.
If this is the worst aspect of a five year record that Weiss campaign can find, it looks pretty good for Giffords.
July 14th, 2006 at 8:52 am
I hope someday Gabby can give a bunch of money to Rip Wilson. That would make it all right.
July 14th, 2006 at 8:54 am
Being headline news does not make this a good thing for Gabby. Her rebuttal will now be picked apart for the inaccuracies that are evident.
July 14th, 2006 at 9:12 am
And so it begins again…good morning colleagues!
As to fundraising. If Giffords has been getting big donors then they should be tapped out. So, if she starts raising less then it might show that her support dried up. That said, if she continues to outraise the other candidates, whether it is $250K, $300K, or whatever, it is impressive. Getting to $750K or above would be frankly amazing at this point and it would show the strength of her campaign.
I agree that Patty needs to get in the game and outraise herself from last time, which was about $183K. If she outraises Giffords in this quarter, that is impressive also. It would show momentum for Patty and that she could add to her base of fundraising from the 1st Quarter.
Still, in the end, we need to look at cash on hand and where people are at vis-a-vis the Republicans, who will be bringing it in the fall.
July 14th, 2006 at 9:19 am
Well Tedski, this topic aside… I just want to say how much i love this blog.
July 14th, 2006 at 10:44 am
oh c’mon people! Show a sense of humor! 6 comments so far and no one has even attempted to answer the quid pro quo question.
I’ll start:
First of all, the $600 was just the monetary donation. I’d like to think she also got a year’s membership and a trip to the nudist resort of her and Capt. Kelly’s choice courtesy of “Bare Necessities,” AANR’s world travel partner. But she probably just got the lousy seashell towel.
In exchange for all this booty, Gabby pledged not to support the “wear red for women day” resolution (cuz they’d rather not have women – or men – wear anything) and killed a proposed amendment to the animal and ecological terrorism bill that would have included scaring the crap out of the wildlife by walking naked in the woods.
July 14th, 2006 at 11:07 am
hahahahahahaha, bored.
July 14th, 2006 at 11:58 am
Good point, bored. Tedski’s humor often brightens my day. Just noted a day or two ago how one of his quips provoked an outburst in a coffee shop that startled my fellow caffeinators.
Please keep doing what you do, Tedski. There are some out here that appreciate.
July 14th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
Giffords campaign reports:
Giffords Raises $291,531 in Second Quarter ‘06, with $588,210 Cash on Hand. This brings her total funds raised above $850K.
July 14th, 2006 at 8:38 pm
The thing I wanted to know about the nude recreationists is how come they are willing to have someone like him who supports Gabby, are they not mostly conservatives?
(Time or Newsweek did a profile a few years ago and they were all these really into “purity” Christians running around “pure” aka nude. Which is impressive because that really is living in a glass house I think.)
July 14th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
Before the stones start to fly, Giffords has now raised a total of $861,712.68. Of that total, $795,862.68 came from individual contributions. If I did the math correctly, that means that just over 92% of her contributions came from individuals.
July 14th, 2006 at 11:50 pm
Check out the burn rate of the cash for Gabby.
She has spent $273,728 since declaring. She won’t have that much more than the Weiss campaign for TV, given these monthly expenses.
She’s so fine, there’s no tellin’ where the money went.
July 15th, 2006 at 12:20 am
Patty got in the game back when she stayed up all night doing her homework. She needs less money than Gabby for this reason. She does her homework, gets the facts and reports the news.
The news is that she is better on TV than Gabby, and much more experienced in public speaking, interviews, and therefore she needs less money for TV than does Gabby.
Patty Weiss also needs less internal polling, consultants and out of state advisors, because she is better known and more popular than any of the candidates of any of the parties.
Gabby is spending a lot of money and I still don’t know what she stands for. I know she belongs to lots of organizations that only people with either money or leisure time could join.
The working poor could never join the clubs and organizations that Gabby belongs to. We don’t have the time to be active when the family must be fed. Depending on someone who does not know these pressures, but will represent me does not give me much confidence. These people bragging about Gabby’s money have lost touch with the families that can never afford to give to these candidates because they have to choose between gasoline and food for survival.
Lots of them work at Walmart, McDonalds, and Bashas and Gabby could have reimbursed Arizona taxpayers (SB 1065) for the money that went to underinsured workers of businesses hiring more than one hundred employees.
She said it was unenforceable, but she had the ability to offer amendments rather than kill it with the Republicans.
I’m hungry, my family is hungry and everyone I know is either on AHCCS, or uninsured.
Everyone on this blog who brags about the ability of money to influence this race is not hungry or they would understand the gap between Gabby and Alex, Jeff and Patty.
Gabby’s excuses for her special interest donations, favors and votes is unconvincing to me, no matter how many times she or her supporters insist they are right in their version.
It is awful, and I am tired of the excuses.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:30 am
The Citizen has an early report on fundraising dollars (not cash on hand).
The most interesting thing is that the communications director for Weiss spins the story in favor of Weiss by saying that Giffords raised less than expected and that she need three times that much to beat Weiss’ name rec. Hilarious.
What the spin is trying to spin you away from is that Weiss actually raised less this time than she did last.
She reports a total of $320K…Last time she pulled in over $180K. If you do that math, she raised less than $140k this time.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:05 am
I am sure Giffords pulled in far more than the weiss campaign had hoped for.
I know what the Giffords campaign was hoping for back in early April when the quarter started, and they exceeeded that.
I seem to recall outlander saying, either here or on TDP, somethng about Giffords’ funding “drying up” — Weiss can’t even dream of having such a dry level of support.
Raising less than half what Giffords did for the quarter is a very poor sign.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:06 am
SAOL,
“There’s no telling where the money went.” ???
Yea, there is. They’re filming ads, purchasing TV/radio time, yard and street signage, paying staff, printing literature, and the list goes on. No reason to believe anything different about the Weiss campaign.
What many have speculated appears to be unfolding, which is a two way race between the ladies. The Weiss number is not particularly surprising. Most interested in the Latas number, but haven’t seen it yet, and in this conversation, no news tends to be bad news.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:33 am
Gabby has spent a fortune to create a campaign in crisis. That is where the money is going. Most people are getting to know her, when she is either in attack mode, or defending herself. Not a great rollout.
July 15th, 2006 at 11:08 am
Anon…
Lots of people know her already. Within the party fold. Some like her some don’t it appears, but most think highly of her. She has a wide network around the state and even nationally.
So I don’t know if I agree with you.
What I do agree with you about is if the attacks get her off message. I think that won’t be occurring so much and I bet there have been a lot who have been turned off by the Patty attacks as much as there have been some who where turned off by Giffords’ response.
Anyhoo…off to enjoy the day.
Best to you!
July 15th, 2006 at 11:15 am
Since someone asked about figures on Latas and others, here is what the Citizen Reports today in its article. These are just overall totals and do not get at cash on hand. Oh…I looked on FEC.gov and as to Johnson. He loaned himself the total amount to his campaign, it appears.
U.S. HOUSE DISTRICT 8
Democrats
Gabrielle Giffords: $861,938
Patty Weiss: $320,000
Jeffrey Lynn “Jeff” Latas: $77,000
William “Bill” Johnson: $58,044
Alex Rodriguez: $32,075
Dwight D. Leister: 7,757
Francine Shacter: $3,198
Republicans
Steve Huffman: $506,588
Randy Graf: $292,259
Mike Hellon: $196,000
Frank Antenori: $5,943
Mike “Michael T.” Jenkins: $5,803
Independent
Jay Dudley Quick: $55,157
U.S. SENATE
Jon Kyl (R): $10.56 million
Jim Pederson (D): $6.01 million
July 15th, 2006 at 11:54 am
Looking at those figures, looks like Graf did a much better job with his fundraising this quarter than he did the first one.
July 15th, 2006 at 12:15 pm
Kral,
The poll and the money do not bear out your thesis. Gabby is lurching about defending but not defining herself, beyond being angry and namecalling.
I do not see Patty attacking Gabby personally, but I see Clean Elections and the WalMart/McDonald/Basha SB1065 favor as being issues and not personal attacks, like the Foxy News quote.
Gabby did better on John C. Scott, but there are statements she made there that can haunt her victory party.
July 15th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
outlander,
I realize you apparently can’t recall what you read, but just to reiterate for those with better short-term memory.
No one disputes bringing up SB 1065 or the fact Gabby has never run under clean elections is a personal attack. Those are facts.
Of course, claiming Giffords “doesn’t support clean elections” when she clearly has supported them in the legislature is disingenious, but even that isn’t personal.
However, Patty going on the radio and saying something to the effect of “I can’t prove it, but Giffords takes money for votes” — that IS a personal attack.
By the way, how do you feel about that “Giffords’ donations are drying up” statement you made a week ago?
July 15th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
I think Gabby needs three to four times more money than the Weiss campaign to introduce her, her issues, and her compelling history as a politician and urban planner.
I think her funds are less than that, and that she has to campaign AND raise funds to do that. She is better at dialing for dollars than campaigning on the ground. Her air war may change that, but it will be expensive.
July 15th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
Gabby absolutely supports Clean Elections and she wants to debate it more in the future. I heard her say it so it must be true.
If she ever runs for state office after this campaign, she should take the $5 contributions avoid the pain that the big checks continue to cause you and her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL2hDffM7TM
Is Gabby being disingenious or merely playing a professional politician?
This must hurt, because you cannot forget the trauma, and you insist that her soothing balm of explanations and technical reasons regarding her stance on Clean Elections and her killing the SB1065 baby without offering amendments nor leadership is okay with you, so I must not be paying attention.
July 15th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Outlander,
OK, if you think she needs 3x or 4x the money Weiss raises then obviously she doesn’t have that much. However, I believes she has more than sufficient difference already to catch up in the name recognition field, and based on fund-raising trends this gap will only widen over the next couple months.
Given the Weiss campaigns’ obvious concerns over the funds gap, I think they agree with me, rather than with you.
I agree Giffords has flaws, any candidate does. Frankly, for the amount of time and effort folks have been picking, they’ve come up with exceptionally little.
I think you hear very well when you want to … and don’t when you choose not to. :)I notice you don’t even bother to contest the point (nor have I ever seen in contested in other threads) that the comments Weiss made during her radio appearance amounted to personal attacks … because no credible defense can be made.
July 15th, 2006 at 7:52 pm
adela la mariah,
I take it by that remark you’re against Jim Pederson as well?
July 16th, 2006 at 12:43 am
I don’t think the very mild comments on John C. Scott were personal attacks, but I think Gabby calling Patty Weiss a Fox News reporter at the Nucleus Club is a negative, personal attack that reflected anger and spite.
The fun part was Gabby asking that there be no negative attacks and then doing her best to contradict herself.
July 16th, 2006 at 3:50 am
Really? Insinuating someone is corrupt qualifies as “mild”? Referring to someone as being “like a Fox News reporters” is worse?
We have differing standards then.
I agree about the Fox news comment, and I wish Giffords hadn’t said it. On the other hand, Weiss got in the first shot, and shouldn’t be surprised as getting one back.
July 16th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Outlander notes:
“I think Gabby needs three to four times more money than the Weiss campaign to introduce her, her issues, and her compelling history as a politician and urban planner.”
Frankly, I disagree with this statement for a lot of reasons, but just to note.
Giffords DOES have over 4 times the Weiss campaign in cash on hand.
July 21st, 2006 at 12:40 pm
I looked into Gabrielle Giffords after reading about her in the local paper. And no one in these parts hardly knows who she is or what she stands for.
I thought someone would know about her besides the local democrats, and I was wrong.
How can we expect a person who is unknown in most of Cochise County to beat the Republicans? Who has the best ability to win this for the democrats?
Leave a Reply