Campaign finance reports can be fun to read. Unlike some of the press release fluff produced by the candidate the report shows where the money and the influence comes from and some instances shows the true colors of the candidate themselves.
And sometimes the reports show some attempts to for lack of better words inflate things to get the number at the bottom higher to show that the candidate is perception and powerful. “They raise a lot of money so they must be doing well.” or something like this. I think Journalism Jen is doing this which I’ll discuss later.
An example of what I’m saying:
When Rep. Martha McLeod ran against Sen. John Gallus her report was filled with “in-kind” contributions actually it was pretty substantial. For example if office space was “in-kind” donated it was still shown as a contribution say $1500.00; well what is the viability of a candidate that raises very little real cash but still shows an impressive campaign war chest of say $80,000.00 filled with volunteers and in-kind donations. Friends and family helping on the campaign trail.
I’ll let you decide. But in this case Sen. Gallus ended up winning.
So in today’s Union Leader there is a biased report about the two candidates for NH GOP Chairman. And Journalism Jen posts some impressive numbers of her fundraising proweress and abilities while her opponent Mr. Hemingway needs to do some work on his financial management skills. It’s one thing to state that you’ve raised millions of dollars for the Newt Gingrich campaign it’s another to clearly demonstrate at least what the strategy was and how it was employed. I seem to recall that nearing it's death throes Gingrich was actually selling photos of himself at rallies for $50.00.
But this still doesn’t let big numbers Jen off the hook.
I’m wondering what her campaign reports look like. How much cash that actually did raise and how much of it was simply things like margin, in-kind, etc. to get that number as a perception political tool just a little bit higher. “They raise a lot of money so they must be doing well.” or something like this.
I’ll state my bias I don’t like Journalism Jen the Webster's dictionary definition of the word superficial fits her exactly. Def: “implies a depth of character, intellect, meaning, etc.” But as I’m hurling rocks Ms. Horn I should consider what Rep. Frank Guinta did on his campaign for U.S. Congress-- simply inject thousands of dollars into his campaign and then offer an explanation of where the cash came from.
Or perhaps this is what she did.