Sunday, May 14, 2006

A comparison of the Cranley/Chabot 2000 match-up vs. the 2006 match-up.

In 2000, by the end of the election:

Chabot raised: $1,083,178
Chabot spent: $1,099,555

Cranley raised: $469,185
Cranley spent: $465,745

April 2006
, with 7 months remaining until the 2006 election:

Chabot raised: $850,171
Chabot spent: $132,432
Cash on hand: $1,106,218
----52% from PACs, 46% from individuals

Cranley raised: $535,234
Cranley spent: $66,148
Cash on hand: $469,086
----24% from PACs, 63% from individuals

These figures show Cranley is well ahead of where he was at this point in 2000. With 7 months left, Cranley has raised about $60,000 more than he did in all of 2000. That means with $469K in 2000, Cranley achieved 44% of the vote. With over double that (predicted) by November 2006, I don’t see how Cranley couldn’t receive 50% of the vote. It’s also important to remember that Cranley has hardly spent anything so far, while Chabot has already spent $130K.

For Chabot, these figures show him fundraising very well, as predicted. He has also carried over quite a bit of cash. I don’t know how he has spent $132K so far, considering the front of his campaign website announces, “The Chabot for Congress campaign is already working hard on Congressman Chabot's 2004 re-election effort.” ...So they have spent over a hundred grand on materials/services/salaries, but haven’t spent a couple hundred dollars to update their website? I assume we should not predict a strong web team from the Chabot campaign in the near future.

In summary, the OH-01 race is going to be very expensive, with both side’s parties putting it all on the line. I hope both Cranley and Chabot agree to do many debates again. I bet the turnout is going to be pretty high for a midterm election too.


At 10:20 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why does the Chabot campaign cups have George Bush on them -- Is that supposed to be Chabot?!

...I bet that guy is from ClipArt!

At 11:54 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey all, that ad reads working hard for working families! Further proving my understanding of the Rep that he forgets to work hard for families of which the heads of the household have LOST THEIR JOB. it should say working hard for rich white families. he'd get more people to drink out of it.Im about done with Mr. Chabot.

At 6:22 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

did you notice how empty the cup is? kinda like the man hisself.

At 10:46 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a great site, how do you build such a cool site, its excellent.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home