We asked you to help us find out Bill Clinton's financial impact on the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. We report the results and the story to go with it. Amanda Michel, director of the Huffington Post's Off The Bus, and the story's writer, Daniel Nichanian, lay out the details. We also speak to Paula Baker, associate professor of history at Ohio State University, about what this all means.
Comments [12]
Thank you to the callers who questioned the purpose of this project. So what if Bill is raising money for his wife? Where's the story? What about Oprah's value to Obama? If you're going to do this you should track the fundraising for all of the candidates in both parties to have any credibility.
after i listened to the program, now i really have MANY doubts about the intention driving this project.
it is obvious Bill Clinton would help Hillary's fund raising big time. we all know that, don't we?
why did you make the project at this point of the campaign, short before the very important Iowa caucus? it doesn't help that you said it should be done for all the candidates when the truth is you only did it on Hillary Clinton. if it is not intended to influence the election, if it is done really for research purpose, the best timing for the project is "after" (not before) the election when you have the complete account of all donations for all candidates.
if it is about the "money" issue, the project would be better aimed at the donors not the candidates.
SCARIEST element of "team clinton"
Clinton Body Count
www.zpub.com/un/un-bc-body.html
I'm glad that CH had a great experience. I'm glad that to be a participant in a historical event of electing the President.
As a participant on the data crunching team for this project, I can say it was a great experience. I heard many callers wondering why this was in any way relevant to the real issues. I would ask this: how many chances do we get to participate in something we know will be HISTORICALLY important? Issues aside, we are all witnesses to a first in American politics, and I for one was glad for the opportunity to be a participant, even in a small way.
Does this project make an impact in the important issues? Probably not. Does it shine a new light on the subject of fundraising? Probably so, if one knows how to interpret the data. But what it definitely DOES do is add perspective to the subject of campaigning in our political process at an historical moment. Instead of looking back to analyze cold historical data decades from now, we are looking at it while it is still "now." THAT is quite a heady thought.
I see the value of this project, but as an undecided Democrat it makes me vaguely uncomfortable. Is there something sinister in Bill's fund raising ability, or just something to be expected. Will this come back to bite us as the "vast left wing conspiracy". It also sounds like the weekly film gross reports.
Even though I have contributed to Obama, I get an almost daily email from Hilary asking for contributions.
I'll be listening.
Thanks.
So what? I think you might be missing the point here, which is that many are going to vote for Hillary because they associate her with Bill. They will possibly outnumber those who "hate" her for
the same reason. All this to say that we would not be talking about her if she were married to my uncle.
Two callers said that our job is to choose a president on the basis of issues, and that this project is merely looking at the horse race and "gotcha" questions.
I agree.
Bill Clinton is helping his wife to raise money. We all knew that.
It's interesting to see more of the details and the mechanism. But now that we know that, how does that make any difference in Hillary's suitability for president?
Some of the authors are Obama supporters, and (as sociologists tell us) any information they get will reinforce their preconceived opinion. Why should it mean anything to the rest of us?
For equal time, you need to look into the money trail of a Republican candidate. How important are the Mormons to Mitt Romney. What about Giuliani. Based on your discussion, looking at Bill's monetary value to Hillary was a bogus issue that didn't shed much light on anything. Aside from the obvious -- he built a fundraising machine that is now being used for her campaign. Go back to local crowd sourcing issues.
i think we should just sell the office to the highest bidder. they money should go to healthcare, education and infrastructure.
It surely is not a coincidence that three of those who were controversially pardoned by Bill Clinton in January 2001 have donated thousands of dollars to Hillary Clinton's campaign.
$2,300 JOHN DEUTCH
Deutch, who was Bill Clinton's CIA Director, was "pardoned...for charges he had mishandled government secrets -- but before the Department of Justice could file the proper paperwork against him."
$2,000 ALFREDO REGALADO
Regalado, an insurance agent, was "pardoned...for failing to 'report the transportation of currency in excess of $10,000 into the United States,' according to the Department of Justice."
$1,000 DAVID HERDLINGER
"Herdlinger [is] a former prosecutor in Springdale, Ark., who, according to press accounts at the time of his pardon pleaded guilty in 1986 to mail fraud after taking bribes to reduce or drop charges against defendants charged with drunken driving offenses."
"% of contributors/money who donated only to a single candidate"
--Do you think that stat might serve to separate contributors who are cynically hedging their bets from true believers in a particular candidate?
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.