The Virginia Public Access Project has published an interactive map, broken down by precinct that shows the dollar volumes and number of contributors to the gubernatorial campaigns of Terry McAuliffe and Glenn Youngkin. If the number of contributors were votes, Youngkin would win the race handily 12,098 to 9,346.
But McAuliffe remains the big favorite among out-of-state donors. Roughly 30% of his $57 million campaign haul has come from outside the state, compared to 9% for Youngkin.
— JAB
(comments below)
(comments below)
We need a special name for interesting visuals that actually convey nothing of any value. Not all zip codes have the same number of people or wealthy potential donors….And not sure how they treat all those Beltway Entities which are national in scope but have Virginia addresses.
Trivia, or trivial works.
But then, when was the last time an election wasn’t bought? Or, for that matter, the first time?
You’re baaaack. How was the Sunshine State? Came back for the McA victory party?
Diseased. But then, like Denmark and fish, eh?
Dunno, but I’m sure gonna enjoy the demands for a ninja audit from RPV. BTW, RPV… I think Rancho Palos Verde has dibs on that.
The only map that ever made an impression on me was the one printed the day after George Allen, Jr., defeated Mary Sue Terry. Every county and every city was red. Allen won them all.
Not seeing that again in our lifetimes. 🙂 But watch a couple of key ones: Henrico, Chesterfield and Loudoun come to mind. I see many parallels with 1993, mainly the complete overconfidence and arrogance displayed by the D’s until the shock of the recent polls. The fact that he’s using signs saying just “Terry” only adds to the impression. The negative mojo of that has struck me all along.
this why one needs to see different views or at least be able to compare and contrast and really understand what is NOT being shown!
Further – this is the REPORTABLE money and a good amount of it is not including the C4 SUPER PAC money.
Yes, adding in (or tracking separately) the “independent” spending would be interesting. VPAP may yet do that.
Ads can be run by C4 super Pacs and not reported via VPAP ahead of the election. So we’re looking at a selective snapshot that probably is not all representative of the complete money picture.
Again, my first comment was this illustration actually tells us nothing of value. Glad you agree.
We agree.. VPAP tries hard and does a good job with the data they do get but it’s almost misleading sometimes… if folks don’t realize it’s not the complete picture.
I remain concerned about the C4 SUPER PACS influence and anonymity and late reporting of money.
Neither party seems willing to tackle it.
Proof positive that the Youngkin campaign has so much money they are coming up with dumb ways to spend it. A friend snapped this in Hampton Roads this morning:
https://www.baconsrebellion.com/app/uploads/2021/11/Youngkin-Banner.jpg
And while we’re sharing images: This is the one that so many Virginians are seeing and it will have a major impact tomorrow. As always, it is the economy, stupid.
https://www.baconsrebellion.com/app/uploads/2021/11/Shelves-scaled.jpg
We’re overfed anyway. Argue with that!
Let’s have real campaign finance reform. No contributions except from individual, living human beings. Ergo, no PACs, bundled, corporate, nonprofit, nonprofit affiliate, or labor union contributions. No out-of-state contributions. No contributions from residents outside the district in which the candidate is running for office. Only statewide races can have statewide contributions.
Any “non-affiliated” entity that campaigns/advertises for a candidate or issue must report any communications with a candidate, campaign or political party.
I don’t know how you keep money from being sent from out-of district, or state from one individual to another then the second individual does the actual donation.
sounds good in theory – hard to do in practice.
Real easy. Make a criminal offense for the candidate or campaign committee to accept an out-of-district contribution. Make it a crime for an in-district person to accept money to make an unauthorized contribution. There is enough hatred among the two Parties that people will snitch on each other.
I would allow a short period to investigate the source of a contribution and to allow a candidate/committee to put a questionable contribution in escrow to avoid prosecution.
right. You can make that law. How would you prove it?
You’d have to make them “report” it and how would you ever know if all of it was reported and if so, it really came from illegal sources?
VPAP lists donors – where do they get that info from? How do they know all sources were reported much less in a guy IN-district actually got his money from someone out of state? How would you prove that?
The U.S. already prohibits foreign donations. We know how to trace money to its source. And dollars to donuts, both Parties will turn in the other’s bad donations.
If someone overseas sends money to someone in the US and that person then donates.. how do they know that?
Isn’t it fairly easy to “launder” the money by having it pass through one or more entities before actually donated?
If someone overseas sends money to someone in the US and that person then donates.. how do they know that?
Isn’t it fairly easy to “launder” the money by having it pass through one or more entities before actually donated?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.