Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Arizona CD-8: Giffords Report

The Giffords campaign today reported the following:

*Over 1,730 separate contributions have been made to Giffords For Congress, 444 of those were made before December 31.

*$562,830 has been contributed as of March 31.

*$314,893 of that between January 1 and March 31.

*Arizona residents have made 1,586 contributions, including
1,191 since December 31. 1048 of those contributions were from Southern Arizona.

What this means I leave up to you…we report, you decide.

(If other campaigns will send me their reports, I'll be happy to publish)


Art Jacobson said...

I have made a correction in this post. The figure of 444 contributions before the start of the quarter is correct.


vetdem said...

$562,000! That says a lot.

anonymous said...

$562,000 says that she'll need another $1,500,000 to match Patty Weiss's name recognition and popularity, both with Democrats and independents.

Time to ring up more donors and get those signs out there.

Its a steep mountain to climb.

vetdem said...

Sounds like Patty probably didn't raise much.

Not a lot of support out there for someone with no worthwhile experience I suspect.

anonymous said...

Another way of putting it:

Patty only needs to raise a fraction of what the other candidates need to get her message out.

Everyone already knows her and her 34 years of covering EVERY major story to hit southern Arizona. That's worthwhile experience that matches the 35 years that Gabby has been on earth running for Congress.

The old saying that 'whoever has the biggest Rolodex wins' has some merit.

Who has more contacts and sources over the last 35 years in southern Arizona?

The BuckStretcher, the Reporter, or the Pilot?

x4mr said...

$562,000, agree with vetdem, says a lot.

In particular, that 1Q06 exceeded 4Q05 is telling. 4Q05's $250K (or something like that) was the easy stuff where she got the $4200 max from boyfriend, mom, dad, aunt, uncle, sister, cousin, close friends and friends of friends.

Difficult to avoid conclusion that 1Q06's $300K+ is the result of the ability to generate community support.

Eager to see figures from the others. Those numbers, too, may say a lot.

Deaniac said...

Hey Anonymous ...

Go check out Patty Weiss's website. You'll notice a poll that she has up there on the upper right side...

It says that 41% of the voters would vote for her against the likely Republican. 41%.

Isn't she super-well known in the district, having delivered the prime time Tucson area news to these voters for the last 30 years?

The second thing I notice about that poll shows State Senator Gabrielle Giffords in a dead heat with the aforementioned Mr. Graf. You know what? I doubt that Ms. Giffords has the same level of name recognition that Patty Weiss has. That means she has room to grow, as do the other Democratic candidates - Latas and Rodriguez.

Patty's hit her ceiling. I'd guess over 90% of the voters know her, and only 41% are willing to vote for her?

vetdem said...


I noticed the same thing about the poll. It looks like Patty is either not well liked by a good percentage of the voters or they don't think that she would make a good representative. Not sure which.

When the voters get to know Giffords over the course of the next several months I think they will realize that she is the logical choice to represent CD-8.

anonymous said...

The quote regarding the Weiss poll is proveably false.

Here's whats at the website:


The data show that Weiss will be a formidable opponent come the general election. In a head-to-head match up with likely Republican candidate Randy Graf she holds a lead of +7 points (41% Weiss, 34% Graf, 24% undecided) while State Senator Gabrielle Giffords is in a dead heat against Graf (34% Giffords, 34% Graf, 32% undecided).

Among registered Democrats in the general election, 65 percent have a favorable impression of Weiss, while 42 percent are favorable to Eva Bacal, and 27 percent to Gabrielle Giffords.

Among registered independents, 48 percent are favorable to Weiss and among Republicans 41 percent are favorable. By contrast, Giffords is viewed favorably by only 12 percent of independents and 12 percent of Republicans.

vetdem said...

Weiss is viewed favorably by only 65% of democrats while nearly everyone knows her! That's not very good.

It would be interesting to see the part of Weiss' poll that asked likely primary voters who they would vote for. I'd bet the results would be very different.

anonymous said...

Gabby would __________ for numbers approaching 65%

vetdem said...

If Patty Weiss is so beloved and her name recognition is worth so much then how come she can't raise the money it's gonna take to win? Everybody loves her and believes in her, and so they... what? They give money? Or they... endorse her? No, they... volunteer. No. Instead, they don't do much of anything. No volunteers. No grassroots. No endorsements from organizations.

Furthermore, the Weiss poll is BAD FOR WEISS. She took a poll three months ago that says only 41% would vote for her against RANDY GRAF--even though almost everybody knows who she is.

If everybody who votes ALREADY knows you, and only 41% would vote for you, well, that kinda sucks. That means less than half of the people who know you will support you. LESS THAN HALF. And there aren't many more people who don;t know you for you to win over. We have a name for people who get supported by LESS THAN HALF. We call them THE PERSON WHO LOSES THE ELECTION.

On the other hand, if only half the people who vote know you and 34 % will vote for you (what Patty's poll said about Giffords), well, then you're in pretty darn good shape! That means that more than three out of five people who know you want to vote for you. Whereas Weiss's poll says four out of nine people who know her will vote for her.

And the amazing thing is--they put this bad poll up on their website! Maybe they're just smarter than the rest of us.

x4mr said...

Thought that poll was old news.

Finding myself agreeing with vetdem again. From my admittedly limited perspective, huge $$ with Giffords is clear for all to see and committed volunteers for Latas appear to be growing, but seeing little in Weiss's corner.

In what metric ($$, volunteers, endorsements, etc.) is she producing?

Am I missing something?

anonymous said...

Keep mentioning the money, over and over.

It makes the Giffords camp sound like they believe the cash is more important than anything else.

And they can't do basic math!

You look really stupid when you distort numbers and emphasize cash.

It does Gabby no good at all, and she deserves better than your type of weird smear.

She has a lot more class and you should at least approach the debate with something other than the ringing noise machine that cash seems to attract.

I know Gabby would be ashamed of your strange math, as she actually knows where she stands with the voters.

Self Appointed Opinion Leader said...

What morons!

Anyone reading that old data knows that these guys are extrapolating a fantasy based on wishful delusions.

Go to the poll and read the math.

Then hold your breath until newer internal polls are leaked showing who is really commanding the numbers in this race.

Then... distort and harangue like GOP operatives. It tends to hurt the party and it does no candidate any good.

The joker in the deck is not money, but trust.

YoliEscondida said...

Wow. Then this CD8 race is pretty much over then.

$562,000 buys a lot of TV commercials for Gabby and lots of other stuff. That will make her awesome lead get to be even greater.

Its cool to think everyone is going over to a woman who is so young and wealthy. Truly groundbreaking.

SonoranDesertRat said...

What purpose does this announcement by Giffords' campaign serve? The only thing I can think of is that it is meant to try to scare the other candidates out of the race. Well, it ain't gonna happen. We don't go away that easily.
Besides, bragging about campaign contributions is not exactly the best move these days, especially in light of all the Republican scandals that were brought about by... campaign contributions.

AZYouLikeIt said...

self appointed opinion leader is half-right -- I've been waiting for other internal polls to leak.

They haven't yet, and I'm convinced there's a reason for that.

Are we supposed to believe that with $500k raised, Gabby hasn't already spent $15k on a poll to counter Patty's?

I don't buy that for a second. Eva Bacall bailed on the race because her internal poll showed Patty was even farther ahead. (Really. Ask around.)

If Gabby had a shred of polling evidence that showed she had a shot against Patty, we'd know all about it, on this blog and tedski's. The fact that it hasn't materialized tells me that all she's got going for her is the cash, and she's hoping the poll numbers will turn around once she starts spending the dough.

Michael said...

The money is nearly unalterably political reality at the end of the day, despite any early polls. Nearly 600K has got to be discouraging to a field of candidates who likely haven't busted 100K (are certainly aren't announcing their numbers prior to the FEC release).

Despite this, I think it is too early for any candidates to be throwing in the towel. Even if Gabby walks away with the nomination, she needs competition whether her supporters think so, or not. I don't think any but a tiny minority are seriously looking at the candidates yet. Money or name rec may not go as far with the voters as we might imagine.

BTW, the constant spiteful spinning is not attractive and is not really helping your candidates. We are all Democrats, people. Let's stick to substance in the family, eh?

vetdem said...

Sometimes it is not a good idea to release an internal poll that shows you are in the lead. This is the case when you want to keep your volunteers working hard and the campaign contributions coming in. If volunteers realize that you have the election won they tend not to work so hard. Donors feel the same about their money. I suspect that Giffords may never release the results of a poll. It does little to get you a vote on election day and might even hurt.

Deaniac said...

Anonymous ...

You just love that poll, no? You're sort of flogging that poll the way you accuse the Giffords people of flogging their fundraising numbers.

Isn't the only truth from that poll that it was commissioned over 12 WEEKS ago? Or, put another way, 3 MONTHS ago? Or put another way again, 90 DAYS ago?

You know what that means? The poll is OUTDATED.

anonymous said...

If Jeff Latas or Patty Weiss have over $100,000 in the first quarter, then they can both damage Gifford's numbers.

If only Patty has over 100K, then she will be able to match Gabby's massive media buys with lots of mailings and shoe leather.

You don't have to be slick, if you are popular.

Deaniac said...

Since the poll is OUTDATED, that means only one thing.

Ms. Giffords WAS in a dead heat with the presumptive Republican nominee, Mr. Graf, 3 MONTHS ago.

Yeah, anonymous, WAS, not is.

anonymous said...

Let's bring this back to braggin' about the cash. That's where this began and where it should end.

anonymous said...

The $562,000 figure contains money that can only be spent on the general election.

If 100 of Gabby's wealthy supporters contributed the maximum of $4200, then only half of that can be spent on the primary.

$210,000 must be saved for the general election and not the primary.

That changes the maximum that Gabby can spend in the primary, and also makes her primary advantage less so.

x4mr said...

Does anyone understand the 11:34 posting by anonymous, the one that talks about "wierd smear" and "distort" and "strange math"?

I don't get it.

Regarding how much can go to primary and how much to general, this is made perfectly clear in the excel spreadsheets you can download from campaignmoney.com.

The math on the spreadsheet is neither strange nor distorted, and way more than half can go to the primary.

sirocco said...

I have heard, as of yet, the Giffords campaign has not spent money on polling. For whatever reason they are using the campaign contributions as an informal poll instead.

This might explain why they chose to release their figures early. They apparently feel it represents a positive polling figure.

vetdem said...

Good point about what can be used for the primary and what must be saved for the general....

.So....I took a look at the FEC website. Here's what I found:

Giffords' contributions for the last quarter of '05 totaled $247k. Only $40k was over the $2100 max per individual for the primary.

Based on the $314k she raised in the first quarter of '06 you might expect the same ratio, which would mean about $51k would have to be saved for the general. The anon who predicted that 100 donors gave $4200 appears to be way off.

I would expect that she had many more donors that were making smaller contributions in the second quarter. So the ratio that I used likely over estimates what she has to keep for the general.

This tells me that she has broad support from the community. I expect that this is the case because she is the most qualified candidate.

YoliEscondida said...

If Gabby keeps it up, everyone will have to quit, because her contributors will keep giving until there is so much money that no one will even want to run in the primary.

Its a good thing that she can raise money like she does. Maybe she'll outraise the republicans!

I don't think lots of money buys elections, it just seems that way to whoever loses.

AZlittleD said...

I keep finding posts and info about Gabby's war chest and donor stuff, but no one has anything clear on where she stands on the issues.

If this campaign is about raising money, then OK.

But is Gabby marching with the Hispanics?

Does she have anything to say about healthcare, beside Medicare D?

I thought that "Arizona CD-8 Giffords Report" would have issues. Instead its a rundown on how much money she has compared to everyone else.

Is this the only direction this CD8 campaign is going?

I think making money her biggest issue is a mistake.

anonymous said...

I think the other ANON's post was a hypothetical.

He said "If..." meaning its not a fact but a conjecture.

I saw no prediction there.

Even $100,000 put away for the general election, is only good if you win the primary.

Talking up cash is bad business, both for pro-business democrats and the rest of us.

Look at George Cunningham's positions, and campaign tactics. Its a mirror of Gabby's... without the cash or pretty face.

sirocco said...

Obviously money can't be the biggest issue in the campaign, but rightnow it's probably the biggest issue.

The primary is a long way off. I would think right now the main goals of any campaign are:

1. Raise money for the summer.
2. Don't make any drastic faux pas.

Most people, even most primary voters, aren't paying that much atention. Getting that money in hand now will be useful for the summer blitz starting in June I would imagine. That's when you get your views out there in the expectation people will remember them.

Self Appointed Opinion Leader said...

Using contributions as an informal poll for support is like looking at Jack Abramoff's contributions as an indicator of how popular GOP issues are with the voters.

Its like saying Elian Gonzalez, Terri Schiavo, and Iraq "poll well."

anonymous said...

Talking up cash, diffusing the issues, and waiting until June to campaign is a drastic faux pas.

There is a lack of substance on local issues, and an emphasis on bragging that "my candidate is richer than yours."

Being rich has its rewards, and running for Congress is a perk that only the famous and the wealthy can afford.

Its sad that money has debased even the proud democrats of CD8.

vetdem said...

Campaign contributions are an indicator of support. It's fairly simple.

Nobody is out there working harder and spending as much time talking about the issues than Senator Giffords.

AlwaysOnn said...

Then what are her issues, besides the money?

I too got suckered by the Arizona CD-8 Giffords Report.

I thought it was some kind of report, instead its a financial ledger.

vetdem said...

What "report?"

You must be talking about the blog entry that Art made.

There is no financial report on her website as far as I can tell.

You will find on her website where you go to hear her speak.

I suggest you do that. She's incredible.

anonymous said...

Her website is incredible, not credible.

Words matter.

SonoranDesertRat said...

"Campaign contributions are an indication of support. It's fairly simple."

By that definition, a lot of Congressmen linked to Jack Abramoff had a lot of support.

Working Joe said...

Gabby's first $250K was all big donors. Anything over $200 is considered a large donor.

Out of that $250K, $148,000 was from donations $2000-$2100+. $41K maxed out.

I do think it is good she can get the large donations. It will help her in the general. She is running a good front runner campaign and taking a nod from the Dean campaign with the cactus fundraiser was an excellent idea. In the primary she needs a lot of volunteers and it looks like Latas has the advantage there.

I'm thinking Latas might pull an upset and win the primary. He is running the smartest grassroots campaign I have seen in years. He keeps getting better and better and has some of the hardest working volunteers any campaign would love to have.

Weiss has the biggest advantage in the general with her name recognition, but based on her stuttering campaign I don't think she will win the primary unless she gets more of her team hitting the streets. I think she has weak, inexperienced people on her team who let one opportunity after another slip and they are overestimating her name recognition value. Like Latas, she has a good set of issues she has taken stands on but you need to be able to get your message across to a wide audience and she hasn't.

My only issue with Giffords is I have no clue where she stands on the issues. I have heard her speak 3 times now and checked her voting record, plus read the pro-Giffords blogs like this one. She is so middle of the road it is hard to know where her convictions lie.

Deaniac said...

Hey Working Joe ... and the anonymous poster that both stated Ms. Giffords is "middle of the road."

Have you noticed that she has what NO ONE ELSE in the race has - a progressive voting record?

Consider that she won an award for being the main sponsor of the mental health parity bill in 2004 - this was a goal of the late, great Senator Paul Wellstone.

She has voted to expand access to health care for kids and the working poor.

She had a 100% voting record from the League of Conservation Voters - a pro-environmental group.

She got a bill passed to get developers to put gray-water systems into new houses, allowing those houses to REUSE water.

She worked with neighborhood activists in Tucson to take on the billboard industry.

These are just a few of the things she's done in her FIVE YEARS in the State Legislature. And she did this before the other candidates even got involved in politics.

Isn't this the stuff we're all fighting for?

George Tuttle said...

We're fighting for more than just a DLC-Led-By-The-Nose robot to go to DC and represent what is important to us-not Hillary Clinton.

Kralmajales said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Working Joe said...

Roger, your last post on the numbers expectations doesn't make sense to me. Weiss entered the race late so why would you expect her to raise only $64,000 less than Gabby for the quarter when Gabby has all the corporate money behind her and Grijalva's whole machine? I would say around $80-100K for both Latas and Weiss would be reasonable to expect. If the majority of the donors are small donors, then maybe less. I will look more to the number of donors and average donation than the total because it is more telling. Her endorsements is a good selling point (for some at least) but I wouldn't use money raised in an appeal to voters because she could get the exact opposite reaction. People are tired of big corporate money buying politicians and influence.

Giffords raised on average $716 per donor from Jan.1st on. That means she is attracting big money, not a large base of support based on her own numbers. The largest number of donors came from the first month, and not the entire second quarter, which doesn't bode well for saying there is a broad base of support. Compare that to candidates like Howard Dean who had 70% of his donors were under $200, and he raised over $50 million. I think touting those numbers can do more to hurt than help Giffords, unless she is specifically targeting big companies and not regular Joe's like me. It personally turns me off. I don't mind hearing about endorsements, number of supporters, or stances on issues. When I hear the bragging of money though, it reminds me of every corrupt candidate I have seen in this state and I am sick of money buying influence.

Working Joe said...

Deaniac said...

Check her record again. Middle of the road, safe. Not 'progressive' unless you and I have a very different idea of what progressive is. Nice try though.

vetdem said...

I'm interested to see who has more donors as well. Latas, Weiss or Giffords? I'd bet it is Giffords.

vetdem said...

And I was correct. Giffords has considerably more donors (i.e. more support) than Weiss. How about Latas? I bet the same.

sally in az said...

I was thinking of backing aGabby but read the blogs that Art link to. I am now in Latas' camp. I don't care about the money. Who is going to go to DC and represent me? Art help point the way for me. Thanks Art for the direction. Your link showed me the way, your attitude, however, needs some reajusting. You should have more respect for someone who has moral fiber like Jeff. I didn't realize his conviction and why he would run until I read his Kos diaries. He was a now body and now look at what he has done. He was a nobody and because of his conviction to spread a word of truth, he has change the face of this race. Like it or not, he is the real person in this race and is running for the right reasons. We all should stand in appriciation to this candidate.

vetdem said...

Speaking as a veteran I'm sure Latas is running for the right reasons. Unfortunately I don't think he will be very effective in Congress. He has been unable to run an effective campaign and is not very organized. He has a lot of time to spend blogging while he's on the road for Jet Blue. That part he does well. The rest - organizing, fundraising, building support within the community has been less than well done by Latas. Look at Giffords for an ethical candidate that has the experience to be effective.

Working Joe said...

Vetdem, a friend sent me an email on this. Weiss has more individual donations than Giffords did her first filing. Giffords had fewer donors give more, Weiss had more donors give less. $900-$1000 for Giffords and around $700 for Weiss on average.

Giffords reported total contributions, not individual contributors. The first doesn't show the number of people who support you the second does. If someone contributed more than once they were counted 2 or 3 times. A friend did a report on it and when you counted only each individual contributor once and the amt they contributed as a total, Giffords had less. If you count both periods, she had about 100 more than Weiss but she was also working on contributions 2 months prior to Weiss. 90% of Giffords were from large donations and 70% of Weiss were.

Working Joe said...

I should have said individual "donators" that Weiss has more of. I don't know all the donations because they only report the total and the single ones $200 and up.