Sanders Pulls In Another $33 Million

Sen. Bernie Sanders raised $33 million in the fourth quarter of 2015, the AP reports.

Key takeaway: “Most of Sanders’ fundraising came through online donations from 2.5 million people during 2015, a number that his team said surpassed President Barack Obama’s record number of 2.2 million donations in 2011.”

Vox: “Sanders’s achievement is all the more impressive both because he doesn’t have access to the traditional Democratic fundraising networks (indeed, he’s been warring with the party establishment), and because of his constant criticism of the influence of corporations and the superrich.”

FavoriteLoadingSave to Favorites
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone
  • Wags

    I love how the Democratic candidates are consistently out-fundraising the Republican candidates this cycle. Let’s hope this translates into more Dem voters heading to the polls in November.

    • I agree. I like our window of debate much better too.

  • Coterie

    Judging from the number of emails my wife received from Bernie before we unsubscribed (as many as 4 or 5 a day), he’s probably raising about one penny per email.

    If it weren’t for fiber optics, he’d be severely hampered.

  • markms

    HOWEVER, Sanders (or any other candidate) cannot compete with Trump’s command of most of the medias’ attention. Still, maybe the composite of the number of total campaign contributions really can translate into total votes.

  • John Herling

    Follow the money. Who’s funding Hillary?

    • APV

      60% of Clinton’s donors are women. 94% of donations in the 4th quarter are $100 or less.

      • nycguy

        And the other 6% could be the majority of her money.

        • APV

          There is no unilateral disarmament when the other side is armed to the teeth and has access to hundreds of millions from billionaire-backed Superpacs for their dirty politics.

          • nycguy

            Bernie seems to have no trouble raising all the money he needs without help from big moneyed corporations who would no doubt be expecting a return on their investment. Don’t you see he’s setting an example here?

          • APV

            Bernie’s strategy, though laudable, will only work in a Democratic primary. It is not a general election strategy, in which the Kochs & Adelsons or self-funded billionaire Trump can easily spend a billion tearing down the Democratic nominee.

          • nycguy

            A few months ago nobody would think it would work in a primary either. So how about not jumping to assumptions so quick? So pessimistic.

          • APV

            Ok, at the end of the day Democrats are not going to keep aside political reality and nominate a self-described socialist and one-time pacifist as the party’s standard bearer. Sanders may win a few state primaries and caucuses, but is not going to be the nominee. One reason why Sanders has very few endorsements from elected officials, including that of his home state Governor, and his congressional colleagues from VT.

          • nycguy

            You mean the elected “establishment” officials? The same establishment that’s in the tank for Hillary? You don’t think they realize that it’s much safer to stay on the Clintons’ good graces than piss them off? But anyway congratulations. If liberalism stays stagnant for the next 50 years and money never gets out of politics, we have brave voices like yours to thank for it.

          • APV

            Hillary Clinton is the most qualified Presidential candidate with strong experience and gravitas. She got 18 million plus votes in the 2008 primary, the most by a Republican or Democrat, man or woman, in a presidential primary contest. That is the more likely reason why she has the most endorsements this cycle and continues to lead in the polls.

            With her as the nominee, there is an excellent chance to win the White House and also retake the Senate. The next Supreme Court will have 3-4 vacancies, with the likely exit of Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and may be Breyer. If progressive justices replace them, the court will be 5-4 or 6-3 progressive majority for another 15-20 years. That court can over turn Citizens United, throw out the “money is free speech” nonsense, and undo many of the Republican-enacted voter restriction laws. These will help pave the way to get excess money out of politics. Clinton supports a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and has stated that her nominees to the court will have to share her belief
            that the court’s 2010 Citizens United decision must be overturned.

            If Republicans win the White House, highly likely that they wil have Senate majority for 4 more years. In that case, the court will become 6-3 or 7-2 Conservative majority for another 15-20 years. That would be the worst setback for progressives in decades.

          • nycguy

            You seem to think it’s a given that Hilary will be this power house in the general. Her trustworthy numbers are still under water. That doesn’t necessarily translate to the excitement needed to win and carry the Senate and House with you. Obama never had less people think he was trustworthy than not. Bernie also does not and most likely will not. And who do you think the youth will be more excited to vote for in a general election?

          • APV

            If the Republicans nominate Trump or Cruz (chances are greater than 50%), the choice will be so clear in terms of qualification & preparedness to be President and Commander-in-chief that Hillary Clinton will win by 7+ points, a spread that Republican Senate candidates in NH, IL, WI, PA, FL, and OH will not be able to cover. The Republican nominee is more likely to emerge bloodied and unable to unite the party. That will mean she has better chances of winning key states like FL, OH, and VA, to deny a path for the Republican nominee to get to 270 EV.

            Hillary Clinton’s numbers on honesty and trustworthiness are a result of relentless and unfair attacks by the media on issues like email and Benghazi. The fact that her numbers have held up reasonably well in spite of the attacks is proof of her tenacity. Anyone else will not be able to withstand such attacks. The same polls that question her honesty and trustworthiness also show she is the strongest leader, and the most qualified and prepared to be Commander-in-Chief. If you go back to 1996 and 1992, Bill Clinton did not do well on that poll question when matched against Dole and GHW Bush. But on issues that mattered in those elections he won handily, and it will a similar scenario in 2016.

            Hillary Clinton may not excite the youth to come out and vote as much as Obama did, but she is likely to excite more women, especially white women in the 50+ age group, to vote for her.

            In my comment, I did not anything about the her ability to turn the House in favor of Democrats. And the House does not matter in confirmation of judges to the Supreme Court.

          • nycguy

            Hilary is getting it nowhere near as bad as Obama got it. Not even close. And his trustworthiness never wavered. So yes he survived the attacks. You can’t blame Republicans for that. That’s all Hillary. Bernie also wins the question on who cares the most about their needs.

          • APV

            You don’t have to take my word. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican majority leader, admitted on TV that the Benghazi special committee was formed to bring down Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers.

            I am not even sure why you are trying to bring Obama into the discussion as if trying to rerun the 2008 primary election. Obama is more likely to endorse Hillary Clinton this cycle to ensure that his legacy will be secure.

          • nycguy

            I thought it was clear I was comparing how the public saw Obama despite the attacks vs how they see Hilary. And Obama is not endorsing anyone in the primary.

          • APV

            Unless you are trying to rewrite history, Obama at this point in the 2008 cycle was not the presumptive front runner and was not attacked as much Hillary Clinton is being attacked by Republicans. Clinton was mentioned 28 times in the last Republican debate, next only to terrorism and ISIS. There are already rightwing Superpacs running ads against her. I don’t think Obama was attacked as much at this point in the 2008 cycle.

          • nycguy

            Who said anything about at this point? I’m talking about from the moment he announced until the day he stepped into office. Pin pointing a specific moment in time won’t help your argument.

          • APV

            If that is your time frame, then you are making an apples to oranges comparison. You are taking a nearly 2-year timeframe from Feb 2007 to Jan 2009, and comparing it a 8 month timeframe this cycle. Wait till Jan 2017 before you draw any conclusions.

            More important, the two cycles are completely different in terms of issues and political landscape. 2016 is coming up already as more negative and vicious than 2008. Here is a quote from a more recent thread on TPW about Right Track/Wrong Track numbers “…this will be one of the most negative races in U.S. history.”

          • nycguy

            Imma say this real slow. Obama at no point in his campaign had underwater trust numbers, despite having the kitchen sink thrown at him. Hillary does right now! I’m not continuing this asinine argument.

          • David Rutawitz

            no, because all that shows me is that sanders is nothing but an idealist and a very naive politician. maybe he has some good ideas but if he doesnt play the game hes going to get nowhere fast.

          • I Am Helpy

            He also doesn’t have to pay for voter research, since his staff just steals that info off other candidates. Think how much money that saves!

    • David Rutawitz

      clearly corporations that own shillary amirite?

  • APV

    Clinton raised $55 million including $18 million for the DNC and state parties. Are there any reports of Sanders raising money for the DNC? This question is not a ding at Sanders, for whom I have tremendous respect. It is just out of interest to know if he is also helping the team.

    • Hagar32Grady

      As of now ..No he has not but promises to do so later on. … He was and still is an Indy , running as a Democratic.

      • evave2

        That is a hard thing for me to understand.

        • Hagar32Grady

          The Democratics are all inclusive …The ‘Cants have their own exclusive club. You do not have to be a Democrat to run on the Democratic ticket. It helps but rules are rules as are lack of same.

    • oldhandatthis

      Bernie is helping the team just by being out there and attracting the support of more liberal or progressive Democrats. I’m not sure if he has great appreciation for the DNC and their debate schedule.

      • nycguy

        He is attracting a whole of liberals that were never interested in voting before. Mainly because they felt the political system is rigged and nobody cares about them. And that is where the DNC is screwing up. They had it in their head from the beginning that Hilary was going to coast to the nomination not anticipating Sanders blowing up like he did. But instead of reassessing their plans and taking advantage of the gift he’s given them, they are doing everything they can to sabotage his campaign and in the process, reinforcing the feelings of these voters about the political process. The same voters they’ve been trying for years to get! And to top it all off, they have to listen to the Hilary camp talk about “Vote for me or it’s your fault if the Republicans win.” Hello. They don’t care! The DNC has some idiots running the place.

        • oldhandatthis

          Dominant politicians in both parties work to get control of the party organs and pass rules or schedules that work in their favor. It just means that it takes several cycles to really change things.

          Hillary won’t be a bad president for progressives, the trick is to help her get all the conditions in place to pass something and maybe repackage it so it sounds nice a moderate. The long poll in the tent will be control of the House. Also I would point out Elizabeth Warren is brilliant at playing this game.

        • Can I read somewhere about how many Bernie supporters never voted before?

          • nycguy

            I saw an article about it months ago. I would have to find it again. Even so, I have seen hundreds of internet posts with supporters saying they registered for the first time just to support Bernie and how they hated politics before he came along and how the DNC is playing the typical politics they always hated, etc.

          • seems reasonable, if mostly anecdotal.

            Dean (and Obama) spurred a similar increase in the electorate, Obama moreso in the end than Dean.

            if it turns out that Sanders doesn’t get the nomination, I predict he will make it a priority to have “his” new voters continue to participate in the electoral (and activism) process.

          • nycguy

            Getting his supporters (mind you, the ones who wouldn’t ordinarily vote) to vote for Hillary would be a huge undertaking but yeah he would definitely try.

          • Hawkeye

            Less than you seem to think. What Sanders has done is to anchor the Democratic Presidential primary left of center and Clinton is right there essentially working with that as a given. No so much of a jump unless one has ulterior motives.

        • ErikDC

          Democrats don’t need a huge number of new voters to win in 2016. They need the people who voted for Obama to show up and vote for the Democrats again. The extent to which Democrats need new voters is only to offset the death rate and population growth.

          • nycguy

            The heck? Then why bother fight the voter suppression laws?

  • ErikDC

    I thought for certain he was going to out raise Clinton this quarter and not by an insignificant margin. I thought he might pull in $50 million. The Clinton camp played the expectations game well on this one.

  • Hagar32Grady

    I’m no Rocket Surgeon but I do not know were they got the $27 average donor figure. 2.5 M donors and $33M last quarter is $13.50. For the year $73M comes to $29.20.

    • ErikDC

      The 2.5 million number is for the year, not the quarter. They did raise around 73 million for the year.

      • Hagar32Grady

        Just to nit-pick (because I can) …That would be 2.7 M donors not 2.5 M ‘-)

  • citizenupset

    Sanders is a lot like trump when it comes to followers. He has an army of liberals/progressives behind him the same ad trump has an army of bigots, racist and assholes.

  • Berkshire_Boy

    Bernie should be raising money for down ballot Dems, as HRC is doing. Espcially since he is using the Democratic party to do something for himself that his own party can’t provide.