Well we’ve reached that moment, the last major fundraising deadline of the year, the inartfully yet aptly named 12-day pre-election report.
This report covers all of April and will be the last extended look at the campaign’s finances until the May 20th primary.
Strouse
In the contest for the Democratic nomination in Pennsylvania’s Eighth Congressional District, ex-Army Ranger Kevin Strouse jumped back into the fundraising lead bringing in $44,278. About $6,000 of that total came from Political Action Committees (PACs) including $5,000 from the Plumbers Local 690 PAC and $1,000 from the IBEW PAC.
Like all campaigns at this late stage of the game, Strouse also spent a significant amount of cash, totaling $192,047 in expenditures. A large chunk of that, $164,195 to be exact, went to GMMB Inc. for Strouse’s television ad buy. Besides that their only major expenses were $2,200 to the Pivot Group for printing campaign materials and $2,100 to NGP Van, an online database firm.
At the moment, the Strouse campaign has $415,804 cash on hand.
Naughton
Meanwhile, businesswoman Shaughnessy Naughton raised $34,914 during the month of April. While this is a decent total, it does mean that Naughton has fallen behind in the money race after taking the lead during the last quarter. Surprisingly, the candidate does not appear to have received any PAC donations during this time.
The Naughton campaign also spent a significant amount of cash in the run-up to the primary. Overall their expenditures came to $84,901, including a repayment of a $5,000 loan from the candidate. Much of Naughton’s spending, $39,647, went to direct mail company The Dover Group. The campaign also used $5,000 for the consulting services of Yellow House Partner LLC and they too spent $2,100 on NGP Van. Currently, the Naughton campaign has $157,979 cash on hand.
These reports reveal a bit about the strategies of each campaign as Election Day approaches. Overall, Strouse appears to be putting his efforts into TV advertising while Naughton is focusing on direct mail. While Naughton has also produced her own video and could still try the airwaves and Strouse has issued his own pieces of mail, it’s clear each candidate has staked out their own method. The question as to which one is correct can only be answered after May 20th.
The candidates are seeking to take on Republican incumbent Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick in the fall.
Loading ...
9 Responses
Kevin’s latest mailer clearly states, as did the article, that he supports the ban. Parsing the word “permanent” to distort his position holds the same value as no new tax pledges by Republicans, both are stupid and juvenile and not worthy of a serious candidate.
@Julia Hmm not sure best campaign strategy is to have Naughton canvassing she might accidentally run into someone who knows something about chemistry
@bristolbrawler -desperate people lie when they lack the intelligence to absorb facts.
On May 21, while licking her wombs, perhaps Naughton will regret her claims of being an expert scientist and actually pursue a doctorate in chemistry.
Liberals fighting over who will spend another 5 months of their life only to lose to a widely popular and moderate incumbent.
Love it.
@susan look it up, he took $10k from fracking companies…follow the money….
as for naughton’s mail piece, i dont see protecting our drinking water as pandering. did you see what happened in WV?
8thDistrictMom — Kevin has said time and again he supports the moratorium. This is just desperation. When I read that quote I see a man who isn’t willing to pander to single-issue activists by talking about permanently banning an entire energy source when the real issue is investing in technology to move us away from it. I’m voting for Kevin because he doesn’t treat the voters in this district like idiots, which Naughton clearly does by the ridiculous lies in her mail. Shame on her campaign for being so reckless with the truth.
@Porter Randolph: I don’t see how her publications about Kevin’s stance on fracking have been a “bald face” (by the way, it’s “bold faced”) lie.
He’s quoted several times saying that he would stop short of a permanent ban on the practice, and has been quoted as saying he supports fracking as an answer to climate change.
I wonder if prior to posting your comment you saw this:
“Talk of a permanent ban is premature and ignores the vast potential for economic growth and new jobs if this can be done the right way, protecting the environment and our water supply,” Strouse said. “We must diversify our energy resources to help create jobs and relieve our dependence on foreign oil.”
http://midweekwire.com/2013/09/25/8th-district-democratic-candidates-split-on-permanent-fracking-ban/
Interesting analysis. As a Democrat who votes in every election, I have probably received 8 pieces from Naughton, although I have also gotten at least 3 from Strouse. I have been critical of Naughton’s last 2 negative pieces as both have tried to spin an innocuous Strouse quote about supporting gas drilling in to a a bald face lie that he supports fracking in the Delaware River Basin. I understand the need to go negative, but easily disproved allegations can backfire. I think she may be toast at this point.
Naughton also has daily canvass shifts. I haven’t heard of Strousse putting much into the field as of yet.