купить семена озимой пшеницы смуглянка 
продам семена пшеницы
купить семена озимого ячменя луран купить семена озимого чеснока купить семена озимой пшеницы в одесской области купить пшеницу оптом
подготовка семян озимой пшеницы к посеву
гибрид кукурузы купить семена озимой пшеницы элиты в украине
  • viagra sex what is the best site to buy generic viagra levitra sample viagra faq kamagra oral jelly online bestellen
  • Mike Pence Stomps John Gregg In First Quarter Fundraising Totals

    John Gregg has already lost. At least, if total dollars raised count for anything, which, in modern times, is indisputably the case.

    The Mike Pence Campaign Committee has released their fundraising figures for the quarter which just concluded at the end of June. In a mere 8 weeks, Mike Pence has taken in a haul of $1.6 million. Perhaps it’s unseemly to crow a little, but permit the indulgence. If we spell it out in standard Arabic numerals, this is how it reads: $1,600,000.

    Pence’s likely opponent, former Indiana State House Speaker John Gregg, managed to raise $717,000. Note the presence of one less digit in Gregg’s concluding figure. A little simple math also provides us with the following conclusion: Mike Pence outraised John Gregg by far more than 2 to 1. It wasn’t even particularly close; Gregg’s dollar amount ranks at slightly below 45% of Pence’s total haul.

    The Mike Pence Campaign Committee’s Kyle Robertson issued the following statement:

    “We are grateful for the outpouring of support from across Indiana and believe these numbers show real enthusiasm for Mike Pence’s vision for building an even better Indiana on good jobs, great schools, safe streets and strong families. These numbers provide further evidence that we will have the resources we will need to win this election.”

    The John Gregg campaign had no official comment on their fundraising total. One is forced to speculate on whether that might constitute what is known as the better part of wisdom. An anemic showing such as this hardly amounts to the supportive sendoff Gregg would have needed in order to prove his chops as a bona fide contender.

    The Indiana Governor’s race is not over. In fact, it has barely commenced. But John Gregg will have to infuse his campaign with a massive adrenaline boost in order to move from the limp status quo to even a leisurely sprint, not to mention a full-throttle run for the finish. However, with a deeply unpopular President in the White House and the residual memory of Hoosier voters of the malaise of previous Democrat governance here in Indiana, where can Gregg turn for the impetus he sorely needs?

    This post was tagged under: 2012 Election, Governor's Race, John Gregg, Mike Pence

    17 responses to “Mike Pence Stomps John Gregg In First Quarter Fundraising Totals”

    1. Jim says:

      Great! Applying your logic (as is "indisputably" the case), then the Senate race is over as well, as Lugar has outraised Donnelly 3 to 1 and Mourdock 8 to 1. Actually, correct that, not just over, done, finished, completed, expired and caput.

      I'm assuming your next blog post will be on that subject?

    2. Nate L says:

      Your journalism is what's wrong with America. Pence has to beat Jim Wallace in the GOP primary first, and Wallace's jobs message and executive experience are scoring a lot more points than Mike's creationist/theocracy drivel. Wallace raised a million dollars, or did you miss that?

    3. The problem with the comparison to the Senate race is that Lugar is a incumbent and has been in office for 34 years. Obviously incumbents are going to be able to raise much more money than challengers, especially in a primary.

      The governor's race, meanwhile, is for an open seat.

      And let's be honest here – Pence is going to run over Wallace.

    4. Scott says:

      Wallace raised a million dollars? Yeah, if you count him loaning his campaign a million dollars on the last day of the reporting period as "raised a million dollars". Talk about astroturf.

    5. @IndyStudent says:

      While Pence's fundraising is impressive, it is by no means surprising. By pretending to run for President and/or another Congressional term, he was able to skirt around state law that bans fundraising for state offices while the legislature was in session. The fundraising for only his gubernatorial campaign is 636,000, while the rest of the 1.5 million is transfers from his federal account.

    6. Scott says:

      What, exactly, do you base that statement on?

      The campaign has said that it moved over around $250,000 from the Congressional campaign. The FEC report for the federal Mike Pence Committee for Q2 2011 isn't out yet.

    7. @IndyStudent says:

      Misread a news report on the issue, so I'll assume you're right as far as the numbers go. But considering he's been unofficially campaiging (and fundraising) for this office for quite some time, him being ahead in fundraising should be no surprise. He's a currently elected office holder, while Gregg hasn't held public office in a decade and Wallace has never held office (and seems to be self-financing his campaign).

    8. Scott says:

      But now you're contradicting what you said earlier. Until he entered the legislature got out of session and he entered the race, the only way Pence could (and, for the sake of your argument, did) "unofficially campaign (and fundraise)" was under the aegis of his federal committee. And he only got a quarter of a million from his federal committee.

      I also don't think it's a matter of Wallace "seeming" to be self-financing. When the disclosure forms show you giving just shy of a million dollars to your campaign, you're self-financing.

      As for Gregg, we've seen anointed Democratic gubernatorial candidates raise far more money than he has, and they'd never campaigned or held office at all, let alone had prior experience as Gregg has had. And Gregg's name has been circulating as a candidate for governor since January, so he had plenty of time to line up donors for maximum early fundraising impact, and he couldn't deliver.

    9. Nate L says:

      Um, question… doesn't self-financing demonstrate confidence and resources, and more importantly, independence from special interests that might hi-jack state government? And isn't all candidates' money green?

      Ironically, this debate about fundraising entirely skips the central issue of the candidates' messages: Jim Wallace wants to help Hoosiers achieve prosperity, while Mike Pence wants to tell Hoosiers how to think–not sure what John Gregg's message is yet. I suspect most Hoosiers will vote for their pocketbooks instead of the color of their neighbor's bedsheets come May.

    10. Scott says:

      Self-financing, in this case, demonstrates that Jim Wallace clearly doesn't mind wasting his money, and that people on his campaign payroll are happier cashing his checks than telling him he doesn't have a chance.

      I'm thinking that Hoosiers of both parties are going to vote for candidates that haven't threatened to kill their wife in the presence of police officers. Not that John Gregg had a happy marriage, mind, but that's a story for another time.

    11. Nate L says:

      Not happy either, for that matter, is the story of how Mr & Mrs Pence came together–people living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, and you, Scott, are flailing away. But I guess you wouldn't care as an employee of a casino, whose very job is at risk should Pastor Pence come back to Indiana.

      Also, bloggers posing as journalists should at least have the integrity to check the facts before launching such libelous statements as yours of Mr Gregg and Mr Wallace. A good lesson in your training would be reporting the facts of (1) the $10 million debt the Pence family left good Hoosiers holding the bag on, (2) the lease of a Pence family central Indiana warehouse the Indiana National Guard was pressed to sign, (3) the ghost employment of key congressional staff members on matters exclusively related to Mr Pence's gubernatorial campaign… the list goes on, but this should occupy you for some time.

      We look forward to your report.

    12. Will says:

      Couple of points here:

      Nobody has ever heard of Wallace except those in Hamilton County that remember the headlines about him threatening to kill his ex-wife. The "confidence" he shows in writing himself a million dollar check only means he has no support from the very business community you say he would help. All Wallace will do is help the Democrats by attacking Pence.

      For anyone to say Pence is trying to "tell Hoosiers how to think" and that he wants to create a "theocracy" is simply idiotic. It's the kind of spewing you would find at Daily Kos. Pence is much better known for his battles against wasteful spending under both parties and his fight to reduce taxes and excessive government regulations. Check out the record before you make false statements.

      And I saw the news report of Pence's fundraising. IndyStudent is way off. According to all reports I've seen, if you take out the transfer from the federal account, Pence still outraised Gregg 2-1. It will be interesting to see how much financial support Wallace has other than from himself.

    13. Nate L says:

      Ah yes, and I see your censorship of this debate was quickly employed. Transparency is frightening, isn't it?

    14. Scott says:

      Was something censored?

      As far as I'm aware, there are no court records involving Mike Pence or John Gregg shouting at their wife (or ex-wife, in Gregg's case) "You're dead" in the presence of police officers; that's a matter of record in Wallace's case. If you think that's the temperament we need in a chief executive in Indiana, then you've found your man.

      As Will noted, Pence is hardly the theocrat you caricature him to be. Indeed, your own candidate seems to have a particularly high opinion of Pence, going by his public statements. He'd just rather he continue to represent the 6th District instead of running for governor. That's a curious platform upon which to base a campaign, and a very different one from what you're employing in your argument here. Perhaps he has told you differently and will soon follow you into the gutter.

    15. Nate L says:

      Unfortunately, I haven't had the opportunity to meet any of the candidates–which, for the better, prevents me from making insinuating judgments of them. I can conclude from facts relevant to the race only that: (a) Mr Wallace's experience and objectives are most on point for what Hoosiers have historically expected of their chief executive; (b) Mr Gregg's experience and political leanings, while leaving something to be desired, at least address Hoosier's economic issues; and (c) Mr Pence's experience and objectives are absent, and he publicly admits that he will not address either until after the primary. Does that seem fair to Hoosier voters? That's what our current president did, and look what a mess that's turned into.

      I'd like to think that there is some common ground that all conservatives can reach on this race, but my fear from your distaste for Mr Wallace is that's unachievable (at least where you're concerned). I'm curious, what would you list as the POSITIVE qualities about Mr Gregg and Mr Wallace and the NEGATIVE qualities about Mr Pence?

    16. Scott says:

      The overwhelming percentage of voters in this state are not going to get the opportunity to meet any of the candidates. That's a lamentable reality of politics in a state with six million people, ten months until the primary and seventeen months until the general election. The judgments they make about them are not going to be informed by personal encounters. The average Hoosier (apart from the political activist) may see one of these candidates in a parade. Most of them won't get even that close.

      Having met Wallace, I found him a pleasant and affable person utterly out of his element in the early stages of a campaign. I don't think spending a million dollars of his own money will change that (and it is entirely possible that it will only get worse as this goes on). My suspicion is that he will spend a great deal of his own money and accomplish very little.

      A mere declaration of "business experience" in and of itself, as preferable as it is to the experience of a lifetime lobbyist and career politician like John Gregg, is not the end-all when it comes to choosing the next governor. There are plenty of executives that have business experience but whose world views are structured around the deforming of free markets, rather than the creation and expansion of them (crony capitalists, etc).

      If your presumption is that it is the role of government to create jobs and employment through ever-greater spending, increased intervention, and more government, then I suppose John Gregg is your candidate. If your views on the role of government in the economy are informed by a belief in the reduction of burdensome regulations, the simplification (or reduction) of tax structures, and the expansion of the individual liberty that is the foundation of free enterprise and entrepreneurship in a dynamic economy, then Mike Pence is your candidate.

      Presumably, Jim Wallace is a Republican because he shares similar views about the economy as Mike Pence (as opposed to being a Republican because that's what people do in Hamilton County regardless of personal ideology or belief). I have not seen, however, any sort of platform or plan of action from Wallace that substantiates that the central thrust of his campaign (jobs) is anything more than convenient rhetoric.

      Perhaps that is yet to come. Until it arrives, we're left to trust that his private sector experience in venture capital and insurance mergers are going to be a good fit for being the state's chief executive. I am not remotely convinced that this would be the case. Those things are very different animals.

      Your criticism of Pence, in support of Wallace, seems to revolve entirely around some sort of false construct involving a theocratic bogeyman similar to that being peddled by John Gregg, so you'll forgive me if I find that distasteful. And that is now apparently to be coupled with your stated preference of both Wallace and Gregg above Pence; one can't help but draw conclusions from that. I also find the comparison of Mike Pence with Barack Obama to be particularly risible.

    17. Paul Divine says:

      Whoa, whoa, whoa….

      First of all, for anyone who knows anything about politics, fundraisint stories on either side are bunk. Either side can make it look however they want to make it look.

      So let's pump some reality into this:

      *Pence is a Republican in Indiana. He is a sitting member of Congress and is a Tea Partier. He will win the fundraising game, so this is essentially a non-story.

      *Pence has been raising money for 8 months, so his total is actually surprisingly low.

      -Subtract the $300K Pence transferred over from his congrressional campaign. Does it give him a lead? Yes. But it's disingenous to count that in the "real total" that everyone is paying attention to. You can't honestly believe that thousands of dollars from DC PACs that he's had on hand for years counts as "blowing out John Gregg."

      -Subtract the huge (at least 2) $100K checks he has in the bank. Does it give him a lead? Yes. But relying on a handful of billionaires to write check hardly constitutes grassroots suppory.

      That makes it about $1 million to $720,000.

      Oh and BTW, comparing someone who has been out of politics for 10 years a "career politician" is a stretch. Gregg has been to the Statehouse twice in 10 years, both for funerals. Pence has probably been to the Statehouse more than Gregg has in the last 10 years, so I guess you can use that talking point.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Get our Daily Digest!

  • Get Your Voice Heard

  • Indiana Federation of Young Republicans

    Indiana Federation of College Republicans
  • Smart Girl Summit 2013
  • Get to Know Us