Cash Machines

Campaign Contributions by Industry

December 21, 2007

Clinton
Raised/Spent: $91m/$40m

63% of her donors have contributed the federal limit of $2,300.

Obama
Raised/Spent: $80m/$44m

26% of his donors have given $200 or less. 47% gave more than $2,000.

Edwards
Raised/Spent: $30m/$18m

Has raised $4.2 million from liberal fundraising group Act Blue, more than any other Democrat

Giuliani
Raised/Spent: $47m/$31m

Has received more money from the tobacco, gambling, and oil and gas industries than any other candidate

Romney
Raised/Spent: $63m/$54m

Romney has put $17.4 million of his own money into his campaign—28% of its total funds.

McCain
Raised/Spent: $32m/$29m

Is the top recipient of telecom money and the second-biggest recipient of lobbyist money (after Clinton)

Thompson
Raised/Spent: $13m/$6m

Has raised only $78,000 from his friends in showbiz; includes $2,300 from Law & Order producer Dick Wolf

Huckabee
Raised/Spent: $2.3m/$1.6m

An ordained Baptist minister, he has received $21,000 from clergy and religious organizations.

Figures as of 9/30/07. May not add to 100% due to rounding. Calculated using figures from the Center for Responsive Politics.

TOOLS

E-mail article
Print article

BACKTALK

E-mail the editor

Post a Comment
Your Name:
Your Comment:
	Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting. All HTML formatting is removed from comments. Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

Where is the information on D. Kucinich and R. Paul?

Posted by:AmandaDecember 22, 2007 7:14:35 PMRespond ^

Are you now, or have you ever been, a real estate agent or mortgage broker?

Posted by:BertDecember 26, 2007 11:43:24 AMRespond ^

Great question Amanda

Posted by:MacDecember 26, 2007 1:48:49 PMRespond ^

I don't know if you guys over at Mother Jones know this or not, but I'm a candidate for the presidency of the United States of America. Just a little FYI...

Posted by:Ron PaulDecember 26, 2007 7:49:50 PMRespond ^

Motherjones is beginning to follow the same path as corporate media in highlighting the "big" names and slowly losing sight of the honest names. Why isn't there equal coverage across the board? Why not highlight were Kucinich, Gravel, and Paul get their money, what their homes look like and what if any doublespeak they have spoken?

Posted by:CampbellDecember 27, 2007 8:10:14 AMRespond ^

Mother Jones espouses itself as making the world a more just and democratic place. And yet, they aren't. Ignoring the smaller candidates isn't making the world any more democratic... especially when those are precisely the candidates who ACTUALLY ARE WORKING FOR A MORE JUST AND DEMOCRATIC WORLD. Get it together, Mother Jones.

Posted by:some kind of BSDecember 27, 2007 1:44:21 PMRespond ^

But still isn't selling any copies. Where are Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich?

Posted by:MoJo Sells OutDecember 28, 2007 1:38:40 AMRespond ^

Include EVERYBODY or NOBODY! The choice is yours.

Posted by:KenDecember 28, 2007 10:02:23 AMRespond ^

and Ron Paul?

Posted by:SethDecember 28, 2007 10:48:56 AMRespond ^

How disappointing! I would have expected a periodical such a Mother Jones to be more "Fair and Balanced" by including all of the candidates financial records. Instead, they have chosen to go along with the "mainstream media" and ignored (as if they don't exist or their platforms are irrelevant) all but the most palatable to the current political regime. Why does Mike Huckabee belong on this list after having raised a paltry $2.3 million, when Ron Paul has raised at least 20 times that amount?

Posted by:SalDecember 28, 2007 1:56:50 PMRespond ^

Mother Jones is just another MSM rag.

Posted by:MacDecember 28, 2007 7:39:10 PMRespond ^

What about Dr. Ron Paul?

Posted by:RussDecember 29, 2007 1:06:03 AMRespond ^

And Ron Paul?????? I just lost all respect for what I USED TO CONSIDER a good news source.

Posted by:Kirby FosterDecember 29, 2007 5:45:26 AMRespond ^

WHERE IS RON'S PIE CHART? Rp has raised more money than any other gop candidate int the 4th quarter Far and away the leader in individual donors and in new first-time donations. Please mother, don't do the msm chill.

Posted by:call me bwanaDecember 29, 2007 10:32:08 AMRespond ^

It would be very interesting to view the pie chart for Mike Gravel. All of the so-called top-tier candidates are beholding to special interest groups, some more to a particular group. It's interesting how Big Pharma hedges their bet, supporting each candidate and covering all bets. How can someone whose pockets are lined by any of these special interests even pretend to be fair and objective in governing on issues that affect that particular industry? We've seen how well Bush and Cheney have taken care of their oil buddies. Can anyone say political / election reform?

Posted by:PeaceBrotherDecember 30, 2007 3:26:15 AMRespond ^

Who is this Ron Paul guy everyone keeps talking about? He will be cast aside along with all the other straight talkers (like Gravel and Kucinich) and portrayed by MSM as a demented flake.

Posted by:PeaceBrotherDecember 30, 2007 3:29:42 AMRespond ^

You just discredited yourself as well as your opinion.

Posted by:SalDecember 30, 2007 12:45:28 PMRespond ^

now we know who Mother Jones' daddy is...

Posted by:digitDecember 30, 2007 2:39:59 PMRespond ^

This site was just refered to me by a friend. What is your point of leaving out Kucinich and Paul??? I really don't understand.

Posted by:DougDecember 30, 2007 2:51:50 PMRespond ^

You've got to be kidding, right? Am I missing something? Where is Ron Paul's pie? $6.04 million raised in a single day from 58,407 individual donors, average donation: $102. Self-organized, decentralized, grassroots. Mother Jones, you stink.

Posted by:thinkaheadDecember 30, 2007 8:08:31 PMRespond ^

In your pie charts on campaign contributions, there is no mention of Ron Paul, who has passed all other candidates in fundraising. As a longtimer congressman with a very credible message, he deserves attention from credible news sources like Mother Jones. The old-line corporate media is pushing him out -- is that where Mother Jones is going editorially? I'm not saying I'm going to vote for him, but he can't be ignored. Thank you.

Posted by:Tom RDecember 30, 2007 11:13:10 PMRespond ^

Editor: Funny, I'm looking for the fearless,smart journalism, much less the unbiased angle.... but no coverage on the moneybomb records held by Ron Paul of late. He has a median contribution of less than 100 bucks, not the corporate influence you seem to support by the shallow article. Ron also leads in contributions from military personnel, thus indicating that those same folks support the elimination of our foreign entanglements----- a peril forewarned by George Washington as well as Eisenhower's warning of our military industrial complex... That, my friends is newsworthy and should be reported on...... Come on.... report the news, like you weren't part of the corporate cabal!!!

Posted by:jim steeleDecember 31, 2007 8:06:46 AMRespond ^

Since I don't see my name here, I must not be a candidate. Since I am not a candidate in your eyes, you are no longer going to grace my eyes. Mother Jones sucks.

Posted by:Ron PaulDecember 31, 2007 10:43:34 AMRespond ^

Correct the error on Giuliani's chart: pie shows 5% Oil and Gas, text says 2%.

Posted by:igmDecember 31, 2007 1:59:27 PMRespond ^

Who turned all the Paul bots on? All I hear is this BS how he is such a big defender of the Constitution. He voted to Impeach Clinton over a blow job but where is his Impeachment resolution on Bush and Cheney? He is doing nothing about Impeaching the biggest threat to our Constitution in my almost 60 years on the planet.

Posted by:Ron Paul SucksDecember 31, 2007 6:52:27 PMRespond ^

Edwards is moving up in the polls. That probably means that people are fed up with the system as it is. Edwards is making the case that insiders will just keep the same old flawed system.

Posted by:Tom EdgarJanuary 1, 2008 8:27:02 AMRespond ^

It is all a disgrace. The graph should be titled, "who really runs the country."

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 8:46:11 AMRespond ^

Amanda, Ron Paul takes in money from "we the people" at $100.00 a head...

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 8:46:58 AMRespond ^

Ron Paul is a viable candiate. The one problem I have with him, however, is his foreign policy. I do not know how you become an isolationist in the world in which we live. It is not 1850.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 8:48:24 AMRespond ^

Ron Paul the $20 million dollar man - supported by the people not PACs, Big Business and Special interest. Ron Paul - a statesmen not a politician Ron Paul - A Constitutional defender not a Constitutional desecrater Ron Paul - the only choice for 2008

Posted by:CawdorJanuary 1, 2008 12:18:29 PMRespond ^

Why don't you post information on Dennis kucinich?

Posted by:PHIJanuary 1, 2008 1:01:33 PMRespond ^

Ames: Paul advocates non-intervention, not isolationism. From wikipedia: Non-intervention is the norm in international relations that one state cannot interfere in the internal politics of another state, based upon the principles of state sovereignty and self-determination

Posted by:thinkaheadJanuary 1, 2008 1:42:45 PMRespond ^

Ron Paul: I don't believe in evolution. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

Posted by:GodJanuary 1, 2008 2:11:14 PMRespond ^

God: Ron Paul's personal beliefs about science and religion make no difference to me. I care only about taming the Imperialist Leviathan. Cheers, happy 08!

Posted by:Baron d'HolbachJanuary 1, 2008 3:10:27 PMRespond ^

Thinahead: Isolationism and non-intervention can be the same thing. Europe practiced non-intervention with Germany until it bombed Poland in 1939. by then it was strong enough to fight a 6 year war. Don't you think it would have been a better idea to go after Germany in 1933 before they were so strong? Regards, Ames Tiedeman

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 4:05:29 PMRespond ^

Tom: I do not think Edwards can win Iowa or N.H. What do you think? Regards, Ames Tiedeman

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 4:07:51 PMRespond ^

Ron Paul! Hello! I just gave you another $100.00!

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 1, 2008 4:10:07 PMRespond ^

Paulbots??? Is it possible that his supporters are legion? The day after tomorrow will answer this question. In February, I will vote for Ron Paul. I would expect that MJ is also threatened, how I don't know how, but I'm sure that it would have been somewhat simple to add the information for the candidates that will be on the primaries. Oh, well, I'll just have to factor this tidbit in in regards to my newsgathering efforts...

Posted by:Larry WJanuary 1, 2008 8:05:27 PMRespond ^

Ames, do you think the U.S. media has been fair to Ron Paul?

Posted by:Mark SummersJanuary 2, 2008 4:58:16 AMRespond ^

Your slogan should be "insipid, timid lackey spew" You guys should get the other graphs completed before you bleed more subscriptions.

Posted by:matthew benjaminJanuary 2, 2008 9:07:15 AMRespond ^

Hi Mark, I do not think the U.S. Media has necessarily been unfair to him. I do not like it however, when some media personalities chuckle before talking about him. This is rather rude and makes the public think they should not take him seriously. This is fundamentally wrong on the part of the U.S. media.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 2, 2008 12:55:05 PMRespond ^

gee, one more case where we don't even see a WHIFF of coverage for Kucinich. typical for MSM: but! I expected MORE egalitarian coverage from Mother Jones interestingly, I never see any coverage that highlights that the Republicans STOLE two previous elections. The ReichWing primaries are merely the opportunity for the NATIONAL BeltWay manipulators & backers to identify the MOST BELIEVABLE Republican 'win' for 2008. Pay attention people. Has anyone cleaned up the ELECTION THEFT? nope. THE INTIMIDATION of Progressive voters? nope. Unfair vote challenges? lost votes? mysterious software 'glitches'? how about illegal & nasty imprisonment of FORMER GOVERNORS such as Siegelman & staffers? the REST is all just windowdressing. Seigelman - "Touched by a Republican": http://thiscanadian.typepad.com/thi s_canadian/2007/08/rove-reaches-ou.html ~~~ Spread Love... BlueBerry Pick'n can be found @ ThisCanadian.com ~~~ "We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid. ~~~ "Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

Posted by:BlueBerry Pick'nJanuary 2, 2008 1:04:52 PMRespond ^

YOUR READSERS want to know where EVERYONE WHO IS RUNNING IN THE PRIMARIES STANDS ON ALL OF THESE ISSUES!!! How are we ever going to get FAIR ELECTIONS IF THEY ARE NOT FUNDED PUBLICLY...NOT EVERYONE TAKES FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE CORRUPT CORPORATISTS/MEDIA OUTLETS!!! SHAME ON YOU MOTHER JONES! KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!!! WHEN PART OF THE DIALOGUE IS LEFT OUT OF THE EQUATION...BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT PROFITABLE FOR THE MEDIA OUTLETS TO REPORT ON (they are counting on advetising dollars from the politicians)WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE NOT GIVEN ALL THE INFORMATION TO MAKE THE BEST CHOICE FOR THE LEADER OF OUR COUNTRY! DENNIS KUCINICH IS MY MAN!!! HE IS A LEADER!!!

Posted by:Rocky LaneJanuary 2, 2008 1:20:44 PMRespond ^

I'm disappointed MJ has decided to limit representations of other announced candidates. While I mean all the candidates, I think progressives would be well served to look at Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. Less hype, more vision.

Posted by:RobertJanuary 2, 2008 1:53:16 PMRespond ^

Ames, I think the media is unfair to Paul. He should be getting more media attention.

Posted by:Mark SummersJanuary 2, 2008 6:12:27 PMRespond ^

You'd have to ask the Bush family about not going after Germany in 1933. It was George's grand-pappy rearming them after all. War is good for business you know.

Posted by:DanJanuary 3, 2008 1:33:54 AMRespond ^

Where's Ron Paul?

Posted by:Paul EhlersJanuary 3, 2008 6:00:43 AMRespond ^

Ames Tiedeman said: "Isolationism and non-intervention can be the same thing. Europe practiced non-intervention with Germany until it bombed Poland in 1939." Wrong. Unless you consider WW1 "non-intervention." Have you read about the events leading up to WW2? Paul's foreign policy comes from a strict interpretation of the Constitution. That is what he believes and he applies it to every issue. And his 20 year voting record proves it.

Posted by:United States of AmnesiaJanuary 3, 2008 9:25:06 AMRespond ^

United States of Amnesia: How would you have handled Hitler and Germany's drive to take over Europe in the 1930's and 1940's?

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 3, 2008 11:03:34 AMRespond ^

Ames, a more interesting question is what economic and political conditions led to the rise to power of someone like Hitler? And who caused those conditions? There are always consequences when we fight wars. Those consequences are then used to justify the next war, and the next, and on and on.

Posted by:AmnesiaJanuary 3, 2008 12:21:04 PMRespond ^

Amnesia, I guess you do not want to answer my very clear queston. You answered me with a question. Quite weak. Care to try again? Here was my questions: United States of Amnesia: How would you have handled Hitler and Germany's drive to take over Europe in the 1930's and 1940's? We do not need to look at reparations from WW1 and what France did to Germany to give rise to a Hitler. Bottom lin is, Germany bombed Poland in September 1939. 1. What would you have done. 2. The inspectors who monitored Germany after WW1 failed. Germany was not allowed to have a army or Navy of the magnitude they built, after their defeat in WW1. What say you?

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 3, 2008 7:15:14 PMRespond ^

sTOP censoring ron paul, mike gravel, and dennis kucinich..These three are the only change agents..put up their info so the people can see it is regular freedom loving people that contribute to these patriots..

Posted by:hONEST aBEJanuary 4, 2008 7:34:39 AMRespond ^

All politicians should be required to wear NASCAR driver suits when appearing in public. The larger the donation, the larger and more prominently the corporate logo gets displayed!

Posted by:Seattle, on the Left CoasJanuary 4, 2008 10:06:32 AMRespond ^

Seattle: Maybe NASCAR drives would make better candidates. Seriously, Hillary got 3rd in Iowa. I have her losing New Hampshire to probably, Edward. Obama will take second. Then come South Carolina, I have Obama as the champ again. I do not see Hillary earning the support of a single state until February 5, Super Tuesday. Further, I do not think Hillary will get the nomination. I see it going to Obama or Edwards.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 4, 2008 10:23:22 AMRespond ^

Dan, The whole country ws trading with Gemrany n 1933, not just the Bush family. And yes, it was wrong. I advocate that the world should have invaded Germany in 1933. The writing ws on the wall. the inspectors failed in 1933. Read your history. I also advocate a strike against Iran. We do not need a Nuclearized Iranian state.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 4, 2008 10:25:38 AMRespond ^

Everyone just back up, very slowly, away from Ames. No sudden moves!

Posted by:thinkaheadJanuary 4, 2008 1:59:14 PMRespond ^

Think! Who will win Ne Hampshire. This is all too much fun to watch! I am telling you, I think Obama is going to rock the house of Clinton!

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 4, 2008 2:04:35 PMRespond ^

Showing Dennis Kucinich would be most revealing!

Posted by:KariJanuary 7, 2008 3:03:31 PMRespond ^

Kari, Of course it would be! My guess is no money from the worst of the worst, like lobbyists!

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 8, 2008 5:47:37 AMRespond ^

@Ames, Do you think Ron Paul will quit the race after New Hampshire?

Posted by:Jeff ScottJanuary 8, 2008 6:45:09 PMRespond ^

Jeff: I don't see Ron Paul bailing, no.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 13, 2008 7:25:11 AMRespond ^

Rudy may be running down cash faster than he had hoped. Some of his top people are now working for free for the next 30 days.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 14, 2008 8:18:15 AMRespond ^

Jeff: I now think Ron Paul will last until February 5th. Super Tuesday will be the end for that one.

Posted by:Ames TiedemanJanuary 15, 2008 2:33:18 PMRespond ^

Where is your data for Ron Paul?

Posted by:AJJanuary 21, 2008 1:48:19 PMRespond ^

Another vote not only for Ron Paul, but for Kucnich and every other candidate who is not mentioned. Let's not turn it into a debate about whether or not one likes Ron Paul because that isn;t what this is about. This is about journalism and fair coverage. I was refered to this page by a friend at another forum. It's been years since I've read a copy, but I had always thought highly of Mother Jones. It's a real shame to see something like this. Also, as nobody has seemed to point out, 29%, 35%, 42% etc. are mighty BIG chunks of the pie to relegate to other IMHO. Doesn't anyone else want to know where that money is coming from? If anyone has any links to a more thorough analysis I would greatly appreciate it.

Posted by:Jimmy SmutekFebruary 7, 2008 2:16:05 PMRespond ^


Meet The Wonder Twins Of Rikers Island More From Mother Jones Timeline: A Crackdown Chronology Hard Time Out		Which Works Better Behind Bars, Scuba or Buddha? 8 Tips for an Easier Prison Stay Why Prisons Banned This Magazine Convicting California