Clinton burying Trump: $42 million to $1.3 million

Donald Trump faces an extraordinary money deficit unheard of in modern presidential politics, entering the month with tens of millions of dollars less than Hillary Clinton.

Clinton's campaign had $42 million in the bank as of May 31, according to its report filed with the Federal Election Commission Monday. Her super PAC Priorities USA has $52 million.

Trump's campaign has $1.3 million.

LINK

Is Trump the biggest underdog in the history of US presidential elections? The electoral college is massively in Clinton's favor, Trump's party barely supports him, Trump's ideological beliefs won't win over many democrats, and he has a gigantic deficit in terms of fundraising to deal with.

He claims he can completely self-fund his campaign if he wants to. Mark Cuban claims otherwise:

Cuban: Trump 'doesn't have the cash' to self-fund

If there was ever a time to cue the "Rocky" theme, it's now. The only problem is, this is real life...

a reply to: Profusion

Would love to see the breakdown of ALL of these donations(both candidates).

Non of this shell corp, pac fund BS either. I want individual and/or corporate names.

Dare to dream though, right.

a reply to: Profusion

Well, it helps to be taking money from terrorists and enemies of the United States. Trump is not a good person, but at least he doesn't take his money from China and the Saudis. Clinton is a terrible person AND she takes funding from the worst types of people.

a reply to: MisterSpock

Why should it matter who has more money? They're not auctioning off the presidency.

Trump's been turning donors away since he filed. Let's see what happens after the conventions. My guess is there'll be donations aplenty.

That and since trump gets a lot of free pub by going on every show on cable, he doesn't need to spend as much. Hillary wants to hide behind the furniture and let the PACs do the dirty work.

It is an interesting presidential campaign though, one of the best for the casual viewer like myself(non political/partisan, not a registered voter).

To me, it seems to be pretty split.

Trump seems to be backed by people, mostly middle class and lower.

Hillary is backed by large corps, 3rd world pirates(leaders) and government lifers.

It's more interesting to me to see what the populace chooses, simply from a curiosity standpoint.

Because the real choosers are the electoral, and whoever is chosen will move no different than the other when the puppet strings are pulled.

a reply to: Woodcarver

It's about the media buys and running commercials in select markets. That requires big $ for saturation broadcasting.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: MisterSpock

Why should it matter who has more money? They're not auctioning off the presidency.

I don't think my post had anything to do with who had more, I'm confused what you are asking.

a reply to: Woodcarver

although you are right, unfortunately that matters. I don't have cable so I am not affected but there are hundreds of thousands of people out there who have voting rights and do not know where to cast their vote. This money buys radio and TV ads usually to bash the other to get votes. A good political ad campaign can harvest many votes, although it shouldn't matter, imo.

These are people who do not follow politics, probably did not vote in the primaries but want to vote for president. They also probably watch the bachelor.

a reply to: Profusion

Not a Trump fan boy (not even a little) but its a terrible reflection on our system when someone needs hundreds of millions in order to become POTUS.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: MisterSpock

Why should it matter who has more money? They're not auctioning off the presidency.

That's exactly what they do. We don't have elections, we have auctions. Where have you been?

a reply to: Profusion

Elections used to be about the message. Not the money.

A sad state our country is in.

Money given by Blood Oil States.

She needs to be flogged for treason, but instead she is being rewarded by Wahhabi States because she pushes an agenda that suits their creeping Sharia ideology.

This is not an accomplishment.

Trump, we will have to wait and see where his presidential campaign leads to see where his dosh comes from.
I have no high hopes it will be any less vile than Hillary's, they're cut from the same Liberal cloth.


Means justifys the ends and all that.

a reply to: Woodcarver

To begin with because he can't win the election with the 14 million votes he got in the primaries.
He's going to need many many millions more to win the presidency so he needs to run ads and get people going door to door talking him up. Spreading his policy message. He needs lots and lots of money to do that.
This past week Clinton spent 8 mil on ads in battleground states. Most 're-introducing her to the people and talking about her record of service. Her PAC ran ads attacking trump as he mocks a disabled reporter. They spent 27 mil.
I've seen one from each so far. I'm in Virginia a swing state.

Then there are the other republicans who are running for house seats. They depend on their party leader to be the primary fund raiser by being popular and getting donations. Presidential campaigns are a big deal for the party. This year every seat in congress and half the Senate are up for grabs. These guys need money to win their states elections. He's supposed to work for that so if he's elected he has a cooperative house to work with. He's not worrying about his legislative house at all. Who's going to legislate all his brilliant ideas if they are at home while the dems take those seats?

a reply to: Profusion

Didn't Clinton say not so long ago that they were basically broke? I wonder if they are using the Clinton foundation as a vehicle or maybe it's those alleged "offshore tax havens" in the Panama papers?

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: gladtobehere

Free enterprise. They want tv time they pay just like Proctor and Gamble. They want posters. They pay just like the rest of us. They want people running campaign offices across the country and those people want to be paid.

Clinton's bought and paid for and buying her way into the White House. Everything Dems accuse Republicans of. But I'm sure they have no issues with Clinton doing it.

a reply to: jjkenobi

did it all come from the Clinton foundation?

Or is it actually mis labeled, thats not her campaign cash, it's her legal defense fund for when she is put on trial for the email scandal then after that on trial again for the Clinton foundation. I cant believe people are actually supporting this woman for president.

a reply to: SM2

If I were a sheeple and believed everything I heard on fox news and the radio I wouldn't support her either but Im NOT!

Looks like Hillary has been bought by the elites to me. That's all this says.