Mitt Romney Campaign Outpacing Obama Campaign in Small Donors – Obama Campaign Runs Deficit in June – Spending on Polling in Millions

Mitt Romney (R) and President Barack Obama (D-Incumbent) - image MNN.com

From the Associated Press via the Atlanta Journal Constitution: “Obama effort spends more in June than it takes in”notes that Obama spent more campaign donations 2 to 1 over Mitt Romney – specifically on ads regarding Bain Capital – an investment that is yet to show signs of paying off – as the country remains politically divided in the national polls and has not moved either up or down by more than 2 to 3 points (See Gallup or Rasmussen daily presidential tracking polls). Moreover it is early in the campaign cycle, given the fact that most U.S. voters don’t begin to really pay attention until the final months of the campaign, which begs the question – will anyone remember in this 24/7 ads based on “seeds of doubt” sewn in early Summer when they are making decisions in late October?

The AP article also mistakes the type of donations being received by the Romney Campaign as follows:

Much of Romney's financial advantage — he raised $106 million last month with the help of the Republican Party — came from larger donations in a handful of battleground states. Those included Florida, where the Romney Victory Fund pulled in about $4.4 million in individual contributions, records show.

This contradicts the New York Times article ”Obama Spends the Most, but Romney Raises More”:

But Mr. Romney sharply improved his take from small donors in June, with checks of under $200 accounting for about a third of his fund-raising, suggesting that Mr. Obama’s advantage might not persist.

In addition both articles note that the candidates’ campaigns will not yet be able to avail themselves of the national Party’s donations until after the Conventions – right now they are relying on personal finances as well as donations from both large and small donors.

Mitt Romney’s campaign has taken a more fiscally responsible route in the past, in February, during the primaries, when the campaign began to show signs of possibly running a deficit, they reigned in spending:(Clevelend Plain Dealer)

The campaign stopped conducting expensive polling ahead of the Michigan primary. Instead, it now counts on lower-cost voter ID phone calls, which aides contend are nearly as accurate as internal polls. Romney also stopped using the 150-seat plane that could accommodate the press after Super Tuesday and is instead flying with a small group of aides and Secret Service agents on a smaller and cheaper aircraft.

Further, his staff is pursing what it calls creative ways to maximize free television coverage to supplement a flood of paid television advertising. Romney notified local media, for example, that he's scheduled to arrive at the San Juan airport Friday at 2:30 p.m., although there are no formal remarks or events planned for that time. That's not typical for the buttoned-down campaign with the tightly controlled media schedule.

The media portrayed the cut-backs as a sign of problems, rather than Romney being Romney as a fiscal conservative running a business in the “black rather than in the red” and therefore, balancing the campaign budget – which in light of the huge deficits run now by the U.S. Federal Government, this would be a plus rather than a negative.

Now, the shoe is on the other side of the aisle – so to speak. In going over the campaign finance reports to the FEC – the Weekly Standard, a Conservative news magazine, found the following:

A line item for the Obama Campaign’s kick-off event found that the campaign spent $93,000 for rental of a 20 thousand seat stadium, which ended up being half-full and, more telling that the campaign in June spent $2,639,265.72 on public opinion polling, which the Weekly Standard suggests is a record for political campaigns. It is well known that from campaigns staffers to advisers and even the candidate make decisions during a campaign that can be viewed as a “mistake” in hindsight, but the polling in particular is of interest. All campaigns poll, down to the state level, however, relying on public opinion polls without a seriously astute analyst, might end up as poor decisions in ad spending – too much – too early. Especially given the fact that the national political parties, both Democrat and Republican are also conducting polling, one might think a camp gin would rely on both – allowing for a reduction in spending at the campaign level. One might look at this two ways: One, the Obama campaign has decided to run on public opinion, which can be risky, as the public changes its collective mind as fast as it changes cable channels and two, this gives insight into the type of campaign being run – one that is tailored to meet what “people want to hear” rather than what the candidate has to offer.

From the beginning the 2012 race has been projected to be a tight race, plus or minus 4 points in national polling margin of errors, meaning that either candidate can win in November, however, it is early and the economy is the driving factor in this race – no matter how either campaign frames its message, come October, should the economy remain the same, then one can expect these numbers to move – even if it appears slight – in polling a 5 to 8 point lead by Romney would be an indicator that (conservatively speaking) of some trouble for the Obama Campaign. However, it is far too early in this game of politics to forecast a win by either candidate based on assumptions of future events no one can determine. Finally, the money game played out in campaign finance only gives an indicator of the “executive in charge” of a given campaign and how that individual might conduct the “people’s business”, as of now, the more fiscally sound campaign appears to be the Romney campaign.