Friday
Oct312008
Obama and McCain's record-breaking campaign finances
Friday, October 31, 2008 at 12:03PM
A discussion at the Brookings Institute focused on campaign effects of the money, ads and mobilization of the 2008 presidential election.
Both campaigns broke records and raised a combined total of $1 billion, said Anthony Corrado, a fellow at the Brookings Institute. While McCain's campaign was well-funded, it was dwarfed by Obama's campaign, which raised more money than John Kerry's and George Bush's 2004 presidential campaigns combined.
In order to compete with Obama, McCain had to rely heavily on the Republican party to run advertisements, said Corrado. Thus, McCain had less control over the messages of the ad. Overall the Republican ads took a negative tone and also attacked other Democrats running for office, making them appear more partisan than Obama's ads.
The overall increase in campaign financing and the huge advantage that Barack Obama has isn't troubling to political scientists, said Larry Bartels, director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics. "To put [it] into historical comparison," said Bartles, "if you go back to before the reforms 1970s, it was quite common for Republican presidential candidates to have two-to-one funding advantages over their Democratic opponents...to gauge the effect of that on the election outcomes, it looks like that contributed something like three percentage points to the average Republican vote margin."
Both campaigns broke records and raised a combined total of $1 billion, said Anthony Corrado, a fellow at the Brookings Institute. While McCain's campaign was well-funded, it was dwarfed by Obama's campaign, which raised more money than John Kerry's and George Bush's 2004 presidential campaigns combined.
In order to compete with Obama, McCain had to rely heavily on the Republican party to run advertisements, said Corrado. Thus, McCain had less control over the messages of the ad. Overall the Republican ads took a negative tone and also attacked other Democrats running for office, making them appear more partisan than Obama's ads.
The overall increase in campaign financing and the huge advantage that Barack Obama has isn't troubling to political scientists, said Larry Bartels, director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics. "To put [it] into historical comparison," said Bartles, "if you go back to before the reforms 1970s, it was quite common for Republican presidential candidates to have two-to-one funding advantages over their Democratic opponents...to gauge the effect of that on the election outcomes, it looks like that contributed something like three percentage points to the average Republican vote margin."
Reader Comments