Las Vegas Sun

May 22, 2012

Currently: 92° | Complete forecast | Log in

Sharron Angle raises stunning $14 million in third quarter

Published Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2010 | 9:27 a.m.

Updated Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2010 | 10:29 a.m.

Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle’s campaign is reporting the conservative candidate raised $14 million last quarter, putting her on a nearly even financial footing with her opponent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Angle’s haul far outpaces any record set by a Nevada candidate, including Reid.

Reid’s campaign has said it is on pace to raise $25 million this cycle. But according to FEC records, the campaign raised just $13.8 million from January 2009 to August 2010. Reid has not released his third quarter fundraising figures yet. NOTE: Reid's campaign says they have raised almost $20 million so far in the six-year cycle that started in 2005.

Angle’s campaign has not released how much money it has spent so far this quarter, but has maintained a heavy statewide television buy since this summer.

Since she emerged from the Republican primary in June almost penniless, Angle has focused almost solely on fundraising. She launched an aggressive small-donor email campaign, held high dollar fundraisers in Washington, D.C., New York, Texas and elsewhere and solicits funds in almost every media interview she gives.

National pundits are likening her fundraising prowess to that of U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., who raised $14.2 million in January, according to the Washington Post.

Discussion: 68 comments so far...

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. The fact that she raised that much money shows how NON-grassroots she really is. It also shows how beholden she is to the businesses that contributed. So the bottom line is this: If you want to see the U.S. Constitution repealed, if you want to have an extreme regime in power, and if you want to see any notion of a democracy dead and buried, vote for Sharron Angle. Me personally, I'll be voting for Harry Reid, the one, lone, sane voice in this race.

  2. Talk about record spending!

  3. It is a sorry indication of American politics that so much money is required by both candidates to try to buy the election. Each party will undoubtedly use most of the money to smear the opponent. Believe it or not, many other democratic countries, like Canada, do not operate their major elections this way. Issues are prominent, not expensive fibbing and lying political ads.

    FromBellevilleCanada (Don Desaulniers)

  4. Contrary to what others have posted, there are distinct limits on how much any individual "person" can give to a given candidate. Based upon these limits ( http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contr... ) it can be seen that Angle's claim to having a "grassroots" appeal is not unreasonable.

    Further, other reports have stated that outside groups have spent about $2M on Angle, that is far less that what she has raised in direct donations.

    Now the question of whether or not a candidate should be allowed to accept out-of-state donations is another matter altogether. Both Reid and Angle have received about 75% of their contributions from people who do not reside in Nevada.

  5. Does anyone else find the current system of financing a campaign disgusting? To me there should be a fixed amount that comes from the government. If someone wants to give to political campaigns it should go to a general fund to be divided among candidates. I believe that elections should not be based upon how good a fund raiser the candidate is. It would also give us a chance to determine how well a candidate uses a fixed amount, i.e. sticks to a budget. The real benefit is that it would prevent anyone or any country from impacting an election. Too many voters appear to be basing their decision on how many lawn posters they see.

  6. Until we do something about the way elections are funded we are going to lose our real freedom. Local elections should be funded by locals no one else. To do so changes the reality of the election. We are supposed to be electing people to represent us no one else. Yet the reality is that people from Texas or wherever else dictate who OUR elected officials are. This practice is extremely dangerous. Especially when either party who happens to have the "money" can further there own interests That pendulum swings both ways and both ways are completely wrong.

  7. 3d3000,

    Do the math. The maximum contribution that a candidate may receive from an individual (which includes corporations) is $2,400. So, $14M divided that that gives a minimum of 5834 contributors. If we assume an average contribution of $250 we see a minimum of 56,000 backers. That's a reasonable claim to being grassroots, especially when you consider that the average contribution is probably even lower, under $100.

  8. The "US" in US Chamber of Commerce stands for "Unnamed States", believe it. How much money came through the Chamber from the Saipan garment industry? You'll never know because Chamber money is "fundable", meaning cash can be exchanged for services, etc. A service to Saipan enriches the Chamber and we go from there.
    Corporations today are allowed UNLIMITED contributions so that one management group, i.e. ONE CEO can donate $250,000 or more to ONE CAMPAIGN. Do the MATH: $14 MILLION, 56 DONORS. Kapish?

  9. Who? can contribute $250.00 or a $100.00 for that matter in this recession who are these grass root people that are not affected by this economy that has an extra $250.00 bucks to send because if you have that money you haven't been impacted.

  10. Where does all the money go ? Please tell me Mr Sun . 25 + 14 million should have the Nevada economy spinning . How much really stays in Nevada ? Or does it go back out of Nevada to the out of state media outlet owners ?

  11. "Corporations today are allowed UNLIMITED contributions so that one management group, i.e. ONE CEO can donate $250,000 or more to ONE CAMPAIGN. Do the MATH: $14 MILLION, 56 DONORS. Kapish?" - SonJon

    That is simply, totally false. Direct contributions to candidates are still limited to $2,400 by individuals. See the link to the FEC I posted earlier.

    What SCOTUS changed was the fact the corporations and organizations are now free to spend on third-party efforts without limit. But the limits on direct contributions is still in place.

    What is also still in place is the prohibition on foreign contributions, which specifically includes those from illegal immigrants. Do you want to check every donation received by Reid and various left-wing PACs?

  12. I love to watch the Republicants spend like crazy to no avail.

  13. TO boftx: I am totally correct in saying that
    "Corporations today are allowed UNLIMITED contributions so that one management group, i.e. ONE CEO can donate $250,000 or more to ONE CAMPAIGN. Do the MATH: $14 MILLION, 56 DONORS. Kapish?"
    Direct contributions by individuals are limited to $2400, but Corporations may provide UNLIMITED FUNDS to political campaign, albeit by giving to SHELL ORGANIZATIONS who themselves give to the Political Campaign.
    "Target recently gave $150,000 to pro-business organization MN Forward in its effort to help elect Republican Tom Emmer governor of Minnesota, where Target is based. The donation has sparked calls for a Target boycott."
    READ ALL ABOUT IT:
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/compan...
    And tell me it isn't so. Stop distorting facts with runaround Winger hose text.

  14. SonJon,

    Contributing to a PAC is not the same as contributing to a candidate's campaign. So your statement is false. Even PACs are limited to what they can donate to a candidate to a maximum of either $2,400 or $5,000 depending upon certain factors.

  15. Special Interest Groups.
    Political Action Committees.
    Corporations.
    Foreign Interests.

    Where on the list of contributors of the 14 MILLION DOLLARS is "contributions from 'grass roots' Tea Party supporters"?

    Where are YOU on the list of importance to Senatorial Candidate Angle's contributors?

    The big dough flowing in here on both sides do not give a RIP about Nevada... couldn't care LESS what state they represent... heck, they aren't really PEOPLE...they're entities... who are essentially purchasing an American Senator. Who CARES what state they're from???

  16. gmag39,

    I really expect better from you than your last post. You know as well as I do that the $14M that Angle reported is fully documented for all contributions over $100 by federal law.

    There is a very real difference between outside groups and a candidate's campaign fund.

    I agree that SCOTUS rendered a horrible decision in Citizens United, and have always pushed for restrictions on campaign donations based on state residency. But you are comparing apples and elephants when you try to the outside groups into campaign funds. Even the amounts are considerably different. Opensecrets.org reports that outside groups have spent about $2M on Angle's behalf, compared to $14M that she has raised directly. Reid isn't far behind on outside spending either, at about $1.5M.

  17. notacon said: "No one who is for the people would raise that amount of money so fast for a senatorial campaign."

    What does that say about Reid who has done about the same and is on pace for a total of $25M? Who is financing him? Don't say Nevada, almost 75% of his money comes from out-of-state. In fact, the last time Obama was here on his behalf Reid couldn't stay the whole time because he was at fundraisers in California.

  18. She was able to raise that much money because of the hate for the incompetent, corrupt, Harry Reid. Everyone knows getting rid of that man is the first step in regaining our country.
    I live in California and have sent donations several times to Angle's campaign. It's not just the people of Nevada that want that horrible man out of office, it's the whole nation.
    Sharron is leading and will win the seat. The swamp is finally being drained...!

  19. Karl Rove is determined to return himself to power and also to defeat his sworn enemy, Senator Harry Reid. Here is some information on where Sharrrron Angle gets her contributions:

    http://www.americanindependent.com/dalla...

    Note that this Texas organization has already spent money on ads slandering Senator Reid. Rove's 527 organizations are created to prevent the American people from knowing who is paying for Republican propaganda, but we can be sure the rich and powerful want Republicans calling the shots again in Washington.

  20. For they so 'Hated Harry' in this Senate Race...
    They bit of their noses to spite their own face!!!

  21. OFF!

  22. SusanKH,

    If you didn't lose a family member on 9/11, your bracelet doesn't mean jack.

    The people who did have differing views, but all agree that those who didn't have no idea of the emotions that are felt when viewing video clips or documentaries depicting the scenes from that day.

    To even try to politicize that event is disgusting.

  23. I actually HAVE inside information on some of the major contributors to Karl Rove's American Crossroads. I have information as to how much they donated, and more importantly WHY they donated and how at least one candidate was willing to sell her vote on a major issue to secure funding from American Crossroads....view for yourself and you tell me.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgyzalpAk...

Post a comment

Commenting requires registration.

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy.

If you would like to submit your comment as a letter to the editor, you may submit it here.