Channel 5 is a bit confused about the new voting machines
ArchPundit
Defending Strange Math
This “Bush Math” appears to be the only kind of math that I have learned. Perhaps you should take a closer look at the accounting. The $34101.16 is listed as an offset to Operating Expenditures. This means it is a rebate or refund. This amount is added to the contribution amount. You really should make sure you are correct before you start talking about “Bush Math”. It really discredits everything you say.
This just posted as I did the last post, but let’s take a look at the fine report Kelly and apparently the Sean commenter
The problem is apparent when you read the summary, but only gets worse after that.
The summary lists $43,900 in contributions.
Then it lists $34101.16 in Total Offsets to Operating Expenditures
Then it lists -34,101.16 in Net Operating Expenditures
Magically, the Cash on Hand is $78,001.16
Care to explain the math Sean? I’d love to know that if you spent $34,101.16 and raised $43,900 you end up with more money than you raised. It reads like a Shrub Budget.
Refunds v. Returns
A refund occurs when the committee has actually deposited a contribution in its bank deposi- tory and then pays it back to the contributor by issuing a check. When a committee refunds a contribution to a donor, the committee must include the refund in the total for the ap- propriate category of refund on the Detailed Summary Page (Line 20(a), (b) or (c)). If the committee previously itemized the incoming contribution on Schedule A, then it must itemize the refund on a Sched- ule B for the appropriate category of refund. 104.8(d)(4). (See example, top right.) Alternatively, a committee may return a contribu- tion to the donor without depositing it, although the return must be made within 10 days of the treasurer?s receipt of the contribution. 103.3(
So again, it’s a little bit difficult to figure out how returning money actually increases your cash on hand unless the magical money tree in your backyard is producing cash pretty fast.
Rebates are money you get back on a purchase–so it’s kind of hard how that could almost be as much as Kelly raised since he reports not spending anything.
Most bizarrely, Kelly doesn’t report any disbursements. Funny. But when you look at his receipts you see all sorts of things that look like disbursements, but have been added together to be receipts.
walter wogtowicz apparently contributed $3500 for campaign fee and wages. Now, in some cases one might think that could be an inkind contribution (even though it breaks the limit), but there is no disbursement as you are supposed to report on the report for in-kind donations. In-Kind donations don’t add to your cash on hand, they add to receipts and they subtract from disbursements.
In his receipt category we find entries from corporations–illegal, refunds–by definition not a receipt, a sign company for $15,000–the limit for a primary campaign is $2,100 even for in-kind (though it’s most like a disbursement in receipts), and all sorts of goodies.
So, if the good commenter Sean would care to explain this to me and how the math is correct and how there aren’t violations of the law from a plain reading of the contributors, I’d love to hear it. But I’d especially love to know what I said that is incorrect and how I’ve been discredited. So have at is Sean.
I wonder why someone would take note of the post? hmmmmmm….
Kelly’s Five Mailings
Congress Daily (at National Journal wrote this about the IL-03 race:
Now, Lipinski faces John Kelly (D), who “blanketed the district with” 5 “direct mail pieces focusing on” Lipinski’s ’04 election
They also wrote that Kelly raised $78,000—-he actually raised about $43,000 including $15,000 he loaned to his campaign.
It’s unclear given that he spent $15,000 on mail that he could have had 5 blanket mailings. It’s pretty unlikely he could afford it since if properly done, he’d report about $7,000 on hand at the end of the pre-primary.
That Rauschenberger Campaign
Pascoe is the reigning champ on for the Hotline Last Call’s daily contest. He wins something at least.
Super Inside Joke
The guy in lower right hand pic in Claypool’s latest e-mail looks far too happy for an election day. He might even have gotten some sleep.
What Are My Endorsements
Since I didn’t get the lot up here’s the short version
The big three: Shore, Claypool, Sullivan. My reasons have been clear for a couple weeks.
10th CD: Seals–he’s for real and seems to be getting a hell of a reception. Nothing bad about Zane at all though.
Treasurer: Mangieri–not of a fan of the untested rich guys. Yes, Mangieri is more conservative, but it’s a non-ideological position.
Governor: Blagojevich—Eisendrath isn’t a serious candidate. I’m not a huge fan of the Governor, but he’s better than a vanity candidate and he’s starting to show a little bit of discipline. All Kids deserves a vote if nothing else.
6th–start the flames, Duckworth. This is a hard decision, but while I think all three would make a great Member of Congress, Tammy is closer to me ideologically on most issues and runs the most disciplined campaign.
Lindy was a close second, much closer than I would have predicted, but ultimately, he couldn’t convince me he could be mean enough in a general election with Roskam. I’m probably closer to him on parental notification (though I’d still have some opt outs for others close to the pregnant girl in question). The other issue is O’Hare. I strongly respect how Lindy came to his conclusion, but ultimately, I’m on the other side. This is a case where he framed the issue far better than other opponents and other politicians would have been smart to listen to him.
Christine is great, but ultimately more liberal than I am and I’m deeply concerned about the campaign discipline. With the exception of Austin Mayor, one thing to note is that in advocating for Christine, much of the netroots push alienated many more people than those advocates might understand. AM did a good job addressing issues and substantive reasons and didn’t whine. If you want to see a way to advocate for a candidate without alienating others, Austin Mayor did it well.
Good luck to all, I’ll be happy when this is over and I can support whomever wins.
One Thing About Lindy
Most Democrats aren’t familiar with Evangelical language–it’s distinct compared to even many of the, for lack of a better word, establishment churches. I can listen to a Bush speech and pick up about half of the references–one of the vital things evangelicals such as Lindy provide is translation into that frame.
Not surprisingly, I started to pick up on the differences by talking to liberal, some radical, evangelicals in Nicaragua and then noticed the same terms and phrases showing up in Republican language.
He’s very good at that and more than that, he can teach Democrats how to think about many issues in a different frame.
Site Issues
It was down last night when I tried to update–if that occurs today, archpundit.blogspot.com is the back-up, but I doubt I’ll need it.
That said, my apologies to Lindy Scott who I didn’t get any of his interview up. It has taught me a lesson that future interviews will be podcasts with analysis on the blog. It’s just too much for one person to keep up postings and do the transcribing.
Lindy’s interview was great–he’s a different kind of a candidate in a good way. While I expect talking points, he gives thoughtful answers, but easily digestable. Usually academics (speaking as one finishing his training) tend to lose their point, Lindy is very disciplined and a great guy. I hope that if he doesn’t win today, he’ll stay active as his voice is something Democrats desperately need.
Anyway, that means I didn’t get my endorsements done and a bunch of other posts.
Darin on more Sierra Club Endorsements
Mildly amusing comments with even Bill Baar calling out some nuttiness (meant in good humor Bill)
Tonight–IRN Radio
I’ll be doing commentary on the primary on Illinois Radio Network–short bits mostly towards the :45 past the hour. A list of stations is available on the site–it’s kind of cool because I grew up listening to the reports on WJBC. Anyway, I’ll be blogging all night and probably talking back and forth with Eric, Rich and a bunch of others so be sure to keep up here and feel free to drop me a line if you have something interesting.