[raw shortcodes=1]
With an open contest for the governor’s office, two U.S. Senate seats, and up to five U.S. House races considered competitive by national groups, one thing’s certain: Minnesota is going to see a lot of campaign fundraising this year. To help make sense of all this, we’re keeping track of two key numbers — amount raised by the candidates and cash on hand. Of course, this is only one part of the campaign spending picture, as political parties, PACs and outside expenditure groups are sure to play a big role in the 2018 election.
Note: Due to differences in federal and state reporting requirements, total amount raised for governor and attorney general is for the calendar years 2017 and 2018, but for U.S. representative and senator candidates is for the 2018 election cycle, which goes from after Election Day 2016 through Election Day 2018.
[/raw][raw shortcodes=1]
[/raw]
What happened to Kurt Daudt?
I thought Daudt was the Republican front runner?
The links are the most important part
I’m grateful to you for pulling this together, and in particular for including the links to the underlying reports so that we can go beyond the two numbers per candidate. In particular, I find it useful to dive into the loans and obligations. A candidate who boosted cash on hand with a personal loan is quite different from a candidate who has a bunch of unpaid bills to print shops and the like.
And who Contributes
The link is also great for showing who is funding each candidate. Any contribution under $200 (small donors) can be categorized as non-itemized. In other words 8 tenths of one percent of T-Paws donations came from contributions under $200. ($8,000 of $1,000,000). Literally the definition of Fat Cat Donors.
It’s the way the contest is played – and likely has been that way since at least the days of the Romans – but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. The numbers are – to a retiree living on a fixed income – staggering. We should stop worrying about whether or not the country will end up with a plutocratic government and begin to devise strategies for how to cope with the plutocracy that already exists. The charts, alas, lend credence to the notion that Congressional Representatives, whether in the House or Senate, likely spend a majority of their time begging for money. There’s nothing very attractive, at least in my own mind, about having to prostitute one’s self in order to win a job that, at least technically, could be labeled “public service.”
It would be helpful if the individual tables were presented using the same scale, rather than using different maximum dollar amounts for each.