We all know that the only reason Democrats are running Jim Graves against Michele Bachmann is because he has the ability to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money. That’s quite literally a drop in the bucket for Jim Graves. His disclosure forms put his net worth somewhere between $22,000,000 and $111,000,000 according to the Strib. But interestingly, he claimed he wasn’t going to… well take him for his word.
Asked how much of his holdings are liquid enough to spend on the election, Graves said he plans to seed his campaign but raise most of the money from others.
“I don’t believe in buying elections,” he said. “I don’t believe in self-funding. If this is going to take traction, you want people’s support.”
But according to the St. Cloud Times, Jim Graves has loaned himself over a half a million dollars to basically bankroll his campaign so far this year.
The $1 million figure includes $270,000 that Graves, a multimillionaire, invested in the campaign this quarter. That brings the total to more than $500,000 that Graves has supplied his campaign this year.
A new KSTP poll shows Bachmann with a safe lead 50 to 41.
If you take his 2nd quarter FEC report where he reported raising (excluding his loans) just $328,433 and believe he raised another million in the 3rd quarter (minus another $270,000 in personal loans) and he actually fundraised only $730,000. Which means in his race for Congress he has only managed to raise $1,054,433 from people not named Jim Graves. (FEC data below the fold)
Let’s think about this here.
Democrats and the media LOVE to say that no one likes Michele Bachmann and everyone wants her out of Congress, yet Jim Graves, the guy running against Bachmann when her approval rating is supposedly so low since she ran for President and “turned her back on her District” but Jim Graves can’t raise any money while Bachmann is out raising just about all other candidates in Minnesota combined.
Take a moment and let that settle in.
Jim Graves has loaned his campaign over a third of the money he has “raised” which just happens to be equal to his cash on hand for the final FEC reporting period.
Think about. With out his loans, he wouldn’t have been running ads to get his name out there and help bash Bachmann, OR he would have done so and been flat broke.
Can you say Jim Graves is actually trying to do what he said he wouldn’t?
“I don’t believe in buying elections,” he [Graves] said. “I don’t believe in self-funding. …”
JIm Graves’ entire campaign haul, including the half a million of his own money he has loaned himself, is just a third of just Bachmann’s in just this most recent quarter of fundraising.
Let’s compare Graves to other Bachmann challengers.
- 2010 Democrat Tarryl Clarke raised almost $4.7 million in her run against Bachmann. (FEC summary)
- 2008 Democrat Elwynn Tinklenberg raised just under $3 million against Bachmann. (FEC summary)
- 2006 Democrat Patty Wetterling raised just over $3 million against Bachmann (FEC Summary)
Tell me again why Michele Bachmann appears to be in trouble against Jim Graves. Because the media doesn’t like her? Because people outside her district don’t like her? Well too bad, they don’t get to vote. I don’t like Ellison, Walz, & MacCollum…..
The question now is how much more of his well above average stockpile of money will JImGraves spend on his own campaign. So far he has had to personally finance his campaign to seem credible. With out his own money, he wouldn’t be running ads, he’d be broke. How much is the hundred million dollar man going o spend on his election?
If Jim Graves isn’t trying to buy the election by supplying a third of his campaign’s revenue, just what is he doing?
|From: 01/01/2012 To: 07/25/2012|
|Itemized Individual Contributions||$232,725|
|Unitemized Individual Contributions||$75,958|
|Party Committees Contributions||$0|
|Other Committees Contributions||$19,750|
|Transfers from Authorized Committees||$0|
|Operating Expenditures Offsets||$0|