3 ms·

Bernie Sanders’ Success Attracting Small Donors Tests Importance of ‘Super PACs’

39 points by nkzednan 11y ago

adventured 11y ago
Sanders and Trump are both demonstrating what you can accomplish when voters decide they've had enough of the status quo. Trump might be able to pull off winning the presidency while spending a fraction of what was spent in 2012. He's getting ten times the free press of the other Republican candidates combined.
- geofft 11y ago
  Is the party machinery realistically going to give the nomination to Trump? (He's not going to win as an independent.) I feel like Trump still being around is an attempt from the party to make people believe the presidential election is a circus, provide cover for more-reasonable candidates (both in behavior and in extremity of position), etc. Sanders is telling voters who have had enough how to engage; Trump is telling voters who have had enough how to disengage.
  - adventured 11y ago
    Another interesting thing about Trump on the Republican side, is how he's showing the extreme weakness of the other candidates without even trying very hard to do so. Ted Cruz has a slim outside shot, behind Bush; so far he isn't lighting anything on fire. Walker is lame as far as his campaign is going. Perry is done. Christie is out before he even got started. Fiorina has come across as more professional than most of the rest, but she hasn't managed to get much national traction, her name recognition is incredibly low still. Ben Carson is irrelevant and never had a shot. Rand Paul's campaign has all but imploded before things even get serious, and he has shown zero traction. All that's left is Jeb. He has some composure, and has a lot of money, but he's like a cardboard prop: low energy, a relatively weak speaker, nothing to get the voters excited. The Republican Party might have no choice in the end, unless Trump's numbers implode or Jeb's campaign finds some energy (either of which certainly might occur). Their biggest concern of course is Trump going for the independent run and guaranteeing the Democrats win. I think they fear that far more than him winning the nomination.
    - deciplex 11y ago
      I wonder if the nominee would offer Trump a position in their administration in exchange for not running as an independent, and if Trump would give a shit.
      - aaronbrethorst 11y ago
        I was thinking through that same scenario the other day, but came to the conclusion that The Donald's ego is far too large to ever accept anything but the Presidency. My guess is that we'll see a Clinton/Bush general election with a 3rd party spoiler. Again.
      - adventured 11y ago
        I think it's incredibly hard to try to decipher what Trump really wants here, and how much that has potentially changed as he has become the lead candidate. He seems to regularly admit that he didn't expect to be leading (in his bizarre Trump-speech style). If that's the case, then initially he was in it just to stir the pot, and for the free publicity. Personally I don't believe half his positions are real. I'm pretty sure the anti-immigration / wall building positions were mostly to fire up the excitable wing of the Republican party, to charge up an emotional issue. It instantly shot him into the spotlight, because many of the other candidates were trying to avoid offending latino voters and or trying to acquire their votes. He was a Democrat for a long time, and was pro-choice for a long time, then magically completely switches positions. I'm skeptical, I think it's far more likely he's happy to pretend to hold various positions as convenient. No different than Hillary and Obama switching positions on gay marriage when it was ideal to do so. I think if it came down to it, and Trump couldn't be President, he'd much rather be back running his businesses, or on TV somewhere. Perhaps doing a new variation of his show. Anything else not only takes him out of his element, but would be stressful and time consuming with little upside (in regards to what Trump seems to usually wants: money, brand building, publicity).
  - skylan_q 11y ago
    He threatened to run independent if they didn't give him the nomination. That would be enough to ruin it for the republican party. The party is devouring itself right now and it's Trump vs. the rest.
- briandear 11y ago
  It may go against my libertarian-conservative viewpoint to say so, but a Bernie or Trump Presidency would be welcomed -- simply because it would be great to have a President that pretty much tells the establishment to go ___ itself. For example it was fun watching Trump stand up to Jorge Ramos of Univision at the Iowa press conference yesterday and it has been great seeing a Sanders catch on fire on the progressive side of things. Regardless of your politics, I think most of us would agree that the status quo isn't acceptable anymore. However I would love it if a libertarian-leaning candidate were doing better, but my particular candidate doesn't seem to be able to break through the noise and get above 3%. Maybe he should wipe some email servers and smack around some reporters!
  - adventured 11y ago
    I agree. It's the only thing I like about Trump being out in front. I'd like to see this election tear down the way we've been electing presidents for the last several decades especially (with incredible sums of money mostly determining the nominees, with lobbyists determining our laws and priorities). It's a great thing that he's putting a huge spotlight on lobbying, special interests, etc. He doesn't mind openly vilifying them, mocking them, playing off voter dislike of it all. If all of this encourages politicians to begin acting differently, then it could significantly alter our political system, and open a shot at various needed reforms. Emboldening them to step out of line.
- cafard 11y ago
  What have they accomplished, other than publicity? It is months until the caucuses and primaries begin.
  - t0mbstone 11y ago
    publicity is 90% of the battle, in politics
huac 11y ago
I mean, on the other end of the spectrum, you have the Donald claiming he'll spend a billion of his own money on the campaign. (of course, if he even has that much in liquid assets is debatable)
- adventured 11y ago
  He has ~$300m in listed liquid assets. Estimates peg it at maybe half that in freely available cash or equivalents. He could easily leverage his real estate assets for some money as needed. A billion would push him to the red line though. He's blustering of course, he won't risk it all for this run. He's currently acting to raise money from voters precisely because he can't actually afford to fund his campaign the whole way.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dang 11y ago
Most stories about politics are off topic here, of course, but maybe this one falls under "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

39 points by nkzednan 11y ago

Sanders and Trump are both demonstrating what you can accomplish when voters decide they've had enough of the status quo. Trump might be able to pull off winning the presidency while spending a fraction of what was spent in 2012. He's getting ten times the free press of the other Republican candidates combined.

geofft 11y ago
Is the party machinery realistically going to give the nomination to Trump? (He's not going to win as an independent.) I feel like Trump still being around is an attempt from the party to make people believe the presidential election is a circus, provide cover for more-reasonable candidates (both in behavior and in extremity of position), etc. Sanders is telling voters who have had enough how to engage; Trump is telling voters who have had enough how to disengage.
- adventured 11y ago
  Another interesting thing about Trump on the Republican side, is how he's showing the extreme weakness of the other candidates without even trying very hard to do so. Ted Cruz has a slim outside shot, behind Bush; so far he isn't lighting anything on fire. Walker is lame as far as his campaign is going. Perry is done. Christie is out before he even got started. Fiorina has come across as more professional than most of the rest, but she hasn't managed to get much national traction, her name recognition is incredibly low still. Ben Carson is irrelevant and never had a shot. Rand Paul's campaign has all but imploded before things even get serious, and he has shown zero traction. All that's left is Jeb. He has some composure, and has a lot of money, but he's like a cardboard prop: low energy, a relatively weak speaker, nothing to get the voters excited. The Republican Party might have no choice in the end, unless Trump's numbers implode or Jeb's campaign finds some energy (either of which certainly might occur). Their biggest concern of course is Trump going for the independent run and guaranteeing the Democrats win. I think they fear that far more than him winning the nomination.
  - deciplex 11y ago
    I wonder if the nominee would offer Trump a position in their administration in exchange for not running as an independent, and if Trump would give a shit.
    - aaronbrethorst 11y ago
      I was thinking through that same scenario the other day, but came to the conclusion that The Donald's ego is far too large to ever accept anything but the Presidency. My guess is that we'll see a Clinton/Bush general election with a 3rd party spoiler. Again.
    - adventured 11y ago
      I think it's incredibly hard to try to decipher what Trump really wants here, and how much that has potentially changed as he has become the lead candidate. He seems to regularly admit that he didn't expect to be leading (in his bizarre Trump-speech style). If that's the case, then initially he was in it just to stir the pot, and for the free publicity. Personally I don't believe half his positions are real. I'm pretty sure the anti-immigration / wall building positions were mostly to fire up the excitable wing of the Republican party, to charge up an emotional issue. It instantly shot him into the spotlight, because many of the other candidates were trying to avoid offending latino voters and or trying to acquire their votes. He was a Democrat for a long time, and was pro-choice for a long time, then magically completely switches positions. I'm skeptical, I think it's far more likely he's happy to pretend to hold various positions as convenient. No different than Hillary and Obama switching positions on gay marriage when it was ideal to do so. I think if it came down to it, and Trump couldn't be President, he'd much rather be back running his businesses, or on TV somewhere. Perhaps doing a new variation of his show. Anything else not only takes him out of his element, but would be stressful and time consuming with little upside (in regards to what Trump seems to usually wants: money, brand building, publicity).
- skylan_q 11y ago
  He threatened to run independent if they didn't give him the nomination. That would be enough to ruin it for the republican party. The party is devouring itself right now and it's Trump vs. the rest.
briandear 11y ago
It may go against my libertarian-conservative viewpoint to say so, but a Bernie or Trump Presidency would be welcomed -- simply because it would be great to have a President that pretty much tells the establishment to go ___ itself. For example it was fun watching Trump stand up to Jorge Ramos of Univision at the Iowa press conference yesterday and it has been great seeing a Sanders catch on fire on the progressive side of things. Regardless of your politics, I think most of us would agree that the status quo isn't acceptable anymore. However I would love it if a libertarian-leaning candidate were doing better, but my particular candidate doesn't seem to be able to break through the noise and get above 3%. Maybe he should wipe some email servers and smack around some reporters!
- adventured 11y ago
  I agree. It's the only thing I like about Trump being out in front. I'd like to see this election tear down the way we've been electing presidents for the last several decades especially (with incredible sums of money mostly determining the nominees, with lobbyists determining our laws and priorities). It's a great thing that he's putting a huge spotlight on lobbying, special interests, etc. He doesn't mind openly vilifying them, mocking them, playing off voter dislike of it all. If all of this encourages politicians to begin acting differently, then it could significantly alter our political system, and open a shot at various needed reforms. Emboldening them to step out of line.
cafard 11y ago
What have they accomplished, other than publicity? It is months until the caucuses and primaries begin.
- t0mbstone 11y ago
  publicity is 90% of the battle, in politics

huac 11y ago

I mean, on the other end of the spectrum, you have the Donald claiming he'll spend a billion of his own money on the campaign. (of course, if he even has that much in liquid assets is debatable)

adventured 11y ago
He has ~$300m in listed liquid assets. Estimates peg it at maybe half that in freely available cash or equivalents. He could easily leverage his real estate assets for some money as needed. A billion would push him to the red line though. He's blustering of course, he won't risk it all for this run. He's currently acting to raise money from voters precisely because he can't actually afford to fund his campaign the whole way.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

dang 11y ago

Most stories about politics are off topic here, of course, but maybe this one falls under "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html