Friday, April 23, 2010

Dispatch Fails to Understand the Morgan-Yost Fundraising Story

Tip o' the hat to Jon Keeling for pointing this out, even though his gut reaction was to buy the Dispatch's spin on it. (Thanks for having an open mind and commenting further on it, Jon.) (Dispatch):
Morgan did not report the employer or occupation for 62 percent of his contributors, compared with 4 percent for Yost.
Morgan did not report the employer or occupation for 62 percent of his contributors because he didn't have law:
(ii) If a political action committee, political contributing entity, legislative campaign fund, or political party that is required to file campaign finance statements by electronic means of transmission under section 3517.106 of the Revised Code or a campaign committee of a statewide candidate or candidate for the office of member of the general assembly receives a contribution from an individual that exceeds one hundred dollars, the name of the individual’s current employer, if any, or, if the individual is self-employed, the individual’s occupation and the name of the individual’s business, if any;
Emphasis added.

Now, you might ask, were 62% of Morgans donations under $100? Consider this, Yost only outraised Morgan by a mere $500 but Morgan had a 4-to-1 ration of donors.

Morgan raised his money from FAR more donors than Yost did meaning the contribution levels were smaller.

But here is the real story that will keep Dave's handlers at the ORP up at night: if somebody is willing to donate to a candidate, they are likely to vote for them that won't hold as we get to real results, but it sure has to be giving somebody indigestion and it ain't in the Morgan camp.