The following is a quote from Andrew Powaleny, Communications Director for Sean Sullivan for Congress, regarding their campaign’s recent fundraising numbers:
“Our campaign has just moved into a new phase with a new team. As a result, the fundraising reflects numbers that do not truly show the whole picture. With a new team in place our support will continue to grow and we look forward to May 10th when Sean Sullivan is our nominee for Congress.”
“Rep. Courtney raised money where he is expected to be raising money, Washington and the special interests. This district has and always will be competitive and we look forward to taking our case to the voters. There are real issues in this district like jobs, education and our defense industry all of which deserve attention. Our campaign will make a point of addressing these and other issues and will hold Rep. Courtney accountable for his lackluster first term.”
And there you have it. We’ll see if the new team, which came on board in March, has a noticeable effect on fundraising next quarter.
11 responses so far ↓
1 matt w // Apr 15, 2008 at 5:21 pm ·
+1
Isn’t that actually not an update on Sullivan’s numbers?
It’s much more like his campaign apologizing for his numbers.
And it still appears — as of 3/31/08 — to be the whole picture, unless and until they post a different picture of some kind.
2 Genghis Conn // Apr 15, 2008 at 5:48 pm ·
--1
The Sullivan campaign needs a turnaround, and fast, if they want to be competitive money-wise. I’m sure they’re well aware of it (they should be). New team or not, though, this is a really lousy position to be in at this point in time.
By comparison, Courtney actually outraised Rob Simmons in Q1 of 2006, $274,688.77 to $222,500, and had raised over $800K to that point.
3 MikeCT // Apr 15, 2008 at 6:28 pm ·
+2
38% of this man’s campaign expenses have gone to polling. They’ll need a much less wacky candidate if they are hoping for a turnaround.
4 TrueBlueCT // Apr 15, 2008 at 7:26 pm ·
--3
As a Connecticut Democrat, I’m grateful to Governor Rell and Chris Healy for having fielded such incredibly weak candidates as Sean Sullivan and David Cappiello.
What it means is that we can concentrate on getting rid of Chris Shays, the conscientious observer turn chickenhawk, who spent Vietnam in Fiji!
Thanks Jodi and Chris! I hope you have a plan for 2010, because after that comes re-districting.
5 Grumpy // Apr 15, 2008 at 7:33 pm ·
+2
Also known as “the death rattle.”
Of vultures.
Which is really good for us because the whole picture is really scary.
And I can’t begin to describe how jealous we are.
Which is something we are going to be repeating a lot in the coming months.
Just as soon as we finish searching the cushions for enough change to pay the bus fare.
And since it’s unlikely you’ll notice what we have to say, we’re just tickled pink that Rep. Courtney is talking about them.
Just as soon as soon as we pay that phone bill. And the rent. And for polling on voter response to the term “lackluster.”
Which is also something we’re going to repeat a lot.
6 CGG // Apr 15, 2008 at 7:48 pm ·
+0
Based on that statement I’d say Sullivan’s new team isn’t any better than the old. The phrase “first term” says it all.
7 rex // Apr 15, 2008 at 8:15 pm ·
+0
Andrew Powaleny, here’s something to think about:
Most people with enough money to give large amounts of money to political campaigns tend to be fairly savvy investors. Savvy investors (not to mention the NRCC), as a rule, don’t invest in organizations that hemorrhage money or organizations that fail to demonstrate meaningful growth potential. Your campaign has both of those toxic aromas wafting all about it. You’ve killed your campaign by giving fundraisers no reason to invest in your campaign. What little money you raise, you burn through at an embarrassing rate.
8 gerardw // Apr 15, 2008 at 9:43 pm ·
--3
If savvy investors are so smart, talk t0 me about subprime mortgages…
9 Eubrontes // Apr 15, 2008 at 11:43 pm ·
+3
Words like “put up or shut up” and “lackluster” sound more than a little hollow coming from a campaign that can barely keep a positive fund raising balance…
10 matt w // Apr 15, 2008 at 11:52 pm ·
+0
gerardw said:
I’ll let you know if I spot any former Bear-Sterners living on the street.
It’s the lower middle class that are getting screwed, not the investors.
11 Dal90 // Apr 16, 2008 at 10:35 pm ·
--1
Probably the worst campaign I’ve seen was the Democrat running for First Selectman in my town last time around…when I heard his campaign ad on election day it reminded me I had to go vote against him.
I liked Simmons. Sullivan sounds decent. And (get ready to be shocked) Courtney I like — if for no other reason then he gets into details with ease. Gedjenson…ugh. I “shared a stage” at a town event many years ago with him and it didn’t improve my opinion of him as just another politician. But if I’m willing to give Courtney a nod, that means the Republicans need to run a very strong campaign to knock him off. No one is safe in the 2nd CD when you look at the elections over the last 30 years and the number of squeakers that have come out of it. Courtney can be beaten in any given year, but it’ll take someone’s A game to do it; or we have to wait for a B+ game and for us to be at the opposite swing of the Democrat-Republican pendulumn we are now.
You must log in to post a comment.