Big Money: Part 2
The Times- Standard proves once again that anybody who's anybody in this county checks out my blog by their follow up on my Big Money post of yesterday. A little more info in their story than the Eureka Reporter's. Of course, they had the advantage of checking out this blog and reading the comments to get some ideas of what to include in their story.
For one thing, they mention that the Gallegos campaign spent something like $5000 on "polling and survey research". I think it would be fair to assume that means the push polls we were talking about yesterday. Now, aren't we all proud of ourselves for bringing up the subject?
I also found it interesting that, in most of the other races the Times- Standard mentions, what would be considered the left leaning candidates seem to be raising the most money. Bonnie Neely's raised something like three times the money Nancy Flemming has in the race for 1st District Supervisor. Nothing filed by self- described progressive, Richard Marks, the other candidate in that race. He's probably not planning on raising enough money to have to file papers.
Jill Geist has raised around three times more than challenger, Pat Higgins. This would be a hard one to say that the lefty in the race has out raised the other candidate since Higgins claims Geist isn't far enough to the left as she should be, for his tastes anyway. I guess we should take him at his word for it. He'd probably know better than we do how far to the left he is, at this point in time, anyway.
Proponents of Measure T have really beat the stuffings out of my very own No On Measure T Committee with close to $7000 raised to our $431. Of course, they've been at it for quite a while longer than us NO folks. Not sure if we're planning a big fund raising effort, or not. The Measure T folks have the inherent advantage of raising unlimited funds, though, whereas the NO folks have set a voluntary contribution limit of $500. A pretty funny situation in itself, it seems to me.
Oh, and if you haven't seen it, yet, I got a mention in the Times- Standard story towards the end. Yet another 15 minutes of fame for me!
I suppose, as far as the candidates are concerned, the big lead in fund raising by most of the lefties has to do with the advantage of incumbency. I guess that's bound to happen. Incumbents always have a big advantage over challengers. You'd think, though, that with all the whining over money in politics, some of the whiners would vote for the candidates and causes with the least money.
They never do, though. The only bad money in politics in most people's minds is the money that goes to the candidate they don't like.