Short CD-5 note

We are overdue for a CD-5 update but news has just come in that the Schweikert campaign raised more than $500,000 in 2007. A very respectable figure considering that he got in the race in the later part of the year.

We will have more details on the other campaigns and the field as we get more information about the 2007 numbers.


Comments

  1. Kralmajales says

    That is quite respectable indeed. How much of it did he loan himself or is this all straight funds?

    Best to you!

  2. “considering that he got in the race in the later part of the year.”

    Except that he was exploratory and able to raise money in September….

    Plus, let’s see how much he had to spend to raise it.

    And, as MayDay mentions above, we don’t know if the loan is 20% or 50% of the total.

  3. Awful lot of bitterness azcd05, is it because the word on the street is that your gal Knaperek is going to put up a number that would look good for a legislative race, but for a congressional race? — not so much.

  4. My guess is that Knaperek’s days are numbered. She is way out of her element here. If she had fundraising totals worth publicizing, you would have seen them already. Maybe there is a JP seat for her somewhere.

  5. Tom,

    Not sure what is bitter about pointing out facts?

    The post said Schweikert had gotten in late in the year. I pointed out that since he had an exploratory in September, he can report 4 months of fundraising in his first quarterly report.

    Since the Schweikert email only says how much he raised, that leaves two unanswered questions — 1) how much did it cost to raise it? (and the Baker/CFG package are well known for not coming cheap.) You can also look to David’s 1994 reports to see his approach on spending to raise $ 2) How much did he loan himself? While initial word was he was doing $100k, he had been telling people that he had raised $425k last week. Maybe just a conservative estimate, but this week, he puts out the nice round number of half a mil. It is impressive, but slightly less so, if 40% comes out of his (and Joyce’s) pocket.

  6. Roger Maris says

    I am not quite sure why it would matter azcd05 if David did commit some of his money to the campaign… First off, it shows me that he is committed to this race.. Secondly, and more importantly, it will still spend the same way in pursuit of defeating Harry Mitchell.

    As far as your swipe at the Club for Growth, your protests rings of sour grapes. The Club endorsement was FREE, and I find it interesting that your pettiness will not allow you to look at Schweikert’s record objectively, as the Club did.

    I have followed David’s career for the past 15 years, and I can honestly say that if all politicians voted the way he did, Congress wouldn’t be mortgaging our future…

  7. kralmajales says

    So, can someone tell me if this guy loaned himself a boat load of money again or not? Last time, it was $100,000. It is ok, by the way to do so, but it is not ok to claim that you raised it all when you gave it to yourself…its far different.

    Now, the impact is probably the same though. If he has more money, he has more money…and that will matter the most when facing an incumbent.

  8. Word to Laura, Jim, Mark, Jeff Hyphen and Susan Hyphen – it’s never too late to get out of the race. But here is the interesting thing – so many of these candidates have so much in common: Laura and Susan have lost more elections than the Green party; Susan and Jim Ogsbury are both earmark lobbyists who make a living at the trough; Jim’s campaign manager and Jeff Hyphen Miller both come from one of the most dysfunctional Corporation Commissions in history; Laura and Mark are both religious lunatics and frustrated ex or current legislators; All of them are hacks looking for a soft place to land in the “up or out” world of term limits and/or simple self-aggrandizement. The final thing they all have in common is that none of them can come out of the five primary and beat Mitchell even sans the registration figures. The only one who is none of the above and who I predict will win the primary is Schweikert. Period, paragraph, end of sentence.

  9. George of the Desert says

    While I will state right now that I support Schweikert, can we please avoid the nasty epithets directed at the rest of the field?

    To call Knaperek and Anderson religious lunatics is base and uncalled for. I know both of them and while I’m a member of neither the LDS or Unification churches, it is, frankly, bigoted to use such a term to describe two people who have ably represented their constituencies and who profess their faith(s) under the protection of the US Constitution.

    The rest of the comments are more tame, but highlight the basic problem with this primary: If the GOP candidates and / or their supporters spend a lot of time trashing each other personally and with such vituperation, Mitchell will get a second term.

    Grow up and lose the playgound taunts — and that means YOU!

Speak Your Mind

*

judi online bonanza88 slot baccarat online slot idn live situs idn poker judi bola tangkas88 pragmatic play sbobet slot dana casino online idn pokerseri joker123 selot slot88