Doesn't Obama have other things to do BESIDES fundraising every other damn day?

Remodeling Maidiac

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
101,230
Reaction score
46,527
Points
2,315
Location
Kansas City
Has ANY other president done this much fundraising while in office? 3 out of 5 days this week fundraising, wtf. It's not like anything else is going on around the world or here at home I guess.
 
Has ANY other president done this much fundraising while in office?

Probably.

You would be surprised how much time your Congressman and Senators spend fundraising just about every single day.
 
Does Grumps have anything better to do than cry about Obama everyday?
 
Yep. Golf and G is right. All those Clowns spend loads of time fundraising.
 
Has ANY other president done this much fundraising while in office? 3 out of 5 days this week fundraising, wtf. It's not like anything else is going on around the world or here at home I guess.

what I am curious about...

How much federal tax payer money has been spent on his fundraising excursions.

I have no doubt, taking into consideration inflation, he beats all others by a long shot.
 
It's the system we have. Get money out of politics and elected officials will spend more time governing and less time fundraising.
 
What I really like is how that's his go-to during a major crisis. Instead of being in the Situation Room or similar command center.

Many of us ex-military types will not forgive this ******* POS of a president for being preoccupied with his Vegas fundraiser while our Ambassador and three other Americans were being murdered in Benghazi.

He did it when mh17 was shot down too. And while illegal immigrants were rushing the border. And while ISIS was speeding toward Baghdad where 100s of Americans still remain in harms way.

I have a long list of why he's a POS, but this is pretty much at the top.
 
Obama has done 395 fundraisers compared to the 218 Bush did for the comparable time period.

Gradations matter. :)
 
The cost of campaigns rises with every election cycle, so politicians have to raise more cash than they did the previous election.

The obvious effect of this is more and more and more time spent fundraising.

Half a century's worth of campaign finance "reform" has had zero effect.


From a 2001 economics paper:
Campaign spending in the United States has tripled over the last three decades. Total expenditures in the average contested House election were $318,000 in 1972, $735,000 in 1992, and $973,000 in 2000 (all figures in 1990 dollars).


Radio and TV air time is a finite resource. Pumping more and more cash into campaigns has probably been a real boon to radio and TV stations.
 
You're not under the illusion that he's actually in charge of his office or something are you?

This assclown can't talk to a room full of third graders without a teleprompter.

It doesn't matter where he is, the office is managed by that sasquatch Jarret and the wookie moochelle. The moonbat messiah could slip into a coma and no one might notice for weeks.




 
Golf, pool, hoops, watching sports on TV, having late night gourmet dinners with the Cognoscenti where he discusses Architecture....

He's a busy guy!
 
The expenditures for House races according to my last post:

1972: $318,000

1992: $735,000

2000: $973,000


You may be wondering, how much did it cost in 2012?


Based on a Media Trackers analysis of campaign finance records, Democrats outspent Republicans $3,050,098 to $2,853,438 in House races, while in the Senate they outspent Republicans by a margin of $1,771,712 to $1,015,014.


It took 30 years to triple campaign spending prior to 2000. Since then, campaign spending has tripled again.

A Congressman today has to raise ten times as much money as his 1972 counterpart!
 
Last edited:
15th post
The expenditures for House races according to my last post:

1972: $318,000

1992: $735,000

2000: $973,000


You may be wondering, how much did it cost in 2012?


Based on a Media Trackers analysis of campaign finance records, Democrats outspent Republicans $3,050,098 to $2,853,438 in House races, while in the Senate they outspent Republicans by a margin of $1,771,712 to $1,015,014.


It took 30 years to triple campaign spending prior to 2000. Since then, campaign spending has tripled again.

A Congressman today has to raise ten times as much money as his 1972 counterpart!

Maybe you can answer this....

I heard President Obama raised about 1 million on his most recent fundraiser yesterday in California.

How much did it cost the taxpayer to fly him there and protect him while he was there?
 
Golf, pool, hoops, watching sports on TV, having late night gourmet dinners with the Cognoscenti where he discusses Architecture....

He's a busy guy!

Hey, he can't issue executive orders 24-7.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2JnCXvm_Qc]Mans Got To Know His Limitations - YouTube[/ame]
 
The cost of campaigns rises with every election cycle, so politicians have to raise more cash than they did the previous election.

The obvious effect of this is more and more and more time spent fundraising.

Half a century's worth of campaign finance "reform" has had zero effect.


From a 2001 economics paper:
Campaign spending in the United States has tripled over the last three decades. Total expenditures in the average contested House election were $318,000 in 1972, $735,000 in 1992, and $973,000 in 2000 (all figures in 1990 dollars).


Radio and TV air time is a finite resource. Pumping more and more cash into campaigns has probably been a real boon to radio and TV stations.

What is Obama running for?
 
According to the Washington Times, it costs the tax payer 180,000 per hour to fly Air Force 1.

So atrip to California would cost about 1.8 million round trip.

Apparently he raised 1 million yesterday in California.

So the taxpayer spent 1.8 million so the president can generate 1 million for the DNC.

Sounds like our government is working just fine.
 
Back
Top Bottom