Real Analysis of the Gernant/McDonald Democratic Primary $

by jhwygirl

Cowgirl took a hoof to my congressional candidate Tyler Gernant today, with a title that misguidedly uses the word “analysis” and a proof-positive that is pretty much pot-kettle-black. {Sigh}

So let’s do some analysis. Not like I hadn’t looked at the numbers – I made mention of that in a comment to a previous post. So I could of written this post up a week ago, but I didn’t really want to go there. But since MtC did, well as any lawyer would say, the door’s been opened.

So let’s look at the last quarter –
Dennis McDonald claims total contributions of $24,262 (link)
Tyler Gernant claims total contributions of $23,566 (link).

BUT, when you take out “In-kind: Campaign Services” donations from Dennis McDonald’s staffers (maximum $2,400 from three of them, and $2,300 from the other) – a total of $9.500 – well, that brings McDonald down to $14,762 in total contributions.

Gernant has some “In-kind” donations himself – $110 in office supplies from his dad, $120 in promotional pencils from someone in Billings, and $163 from Tyler (himself). That’s a total of $393, bringing Gernant down to $23,173.

Gernant $23,173 to McDonald’s $14,762?

Cowgirl’s making hay over the fact that Gernant got $362 more in out-of-state contributions than McDonald? And Gernant has family that now live out-of-state? While McDonald is from San Francisco? That’s the “nearly pot-kettle-black” part I mentioned above.

Let’s look at loans the candidates make to themselves: Gernant has loaned himself a total of $1,800 bucks the whole campaign. McDonald’s loaned himself a total of $10,835, with $9,835 coming just this last quarter.

Wouldn’t you think McDonald would be doing better at raising funds as we drill down to the primary?

Sure seems to me like Gernant has some momentum going….and maybe that’s why she’s going after Gernant instead of going after the other Dennis’ PAC money…something our own b’birder Pete points out in his comment to Cowgirl’s post.

Of course, Dennis Rehberg’s pulled in over $153,000 this quarter, with $53,000 of it coming from PAC’s (Gernant has $0 PAC, McDonald with $100).

Some of Rehberg’s PAC and industry money?

$1,000 from the Sugar Cane League PAC in Louisiana (and another $500 from the American Sugarbeet Grower’s Association in Washington DC).
$1,000 from the BP North America Employee PAC in Illinois.
ConocoPhillips Spirit PAC out of Oklahoma gave $1,000.
Another one out of Oaklahoma – Devon Energy Corporation PAC – gave $1,000.
Employees of Northrop Grumman Corp PAC of California gave $1,000 ($6,000 to date).
Chevron Employees PAC (of California, too) gave $1,000 ($2,000 to date).
EnergySolutions Inc Fund/Effective Govt (tea baggy sounding, no?) out of Washington DC gave $1,000 ($2,000 to date)
Florida Sugar Cane League PAC (of Washington DC) $1,000
Halliburton/Brown & Root PAC (Washington DC, of course) $1,000

The list goes one.

I didn’t know Montana grew sugar cane.

  1. Pilot

    Energy Solutions Inc. is a consulting firm dealing with natural gas giving advice on purchasing.

    The sugar cane industry is the beneficiary of enormous crop subsidies at the same time it has caused catastrophic damage to the Everglades through water diversions and fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide use.

    Just the sort of business Rehberg would love, even if it wasn’t shoveling all that money his way.

    The rest of the contributors are energy corporations and builders sucking at the government teat, and denying global warming and its consequences.

    Devon is a Texas firm heavily invested in Alberta (including oil sands) and B.C. oil and especially natural gas production, so they would have an interest in facilitation of production equipment shipped through Montana as reflected in another post today.

  2. Kevin

    This is the worst analysis of political fundraising I’ve seen in some time. Your selective choice of numbers, your lack of understanding of campaign finance laws, and your pure obvious bias make you a complete joke.

    I could go on, but you aren’t capable of objective thinking, so whatever…

    • Welcome to 4&20, enjoy your stay!

    • JC

      Instead of just throwing bricks, how about you back up your spittle with some facts and rebuttal?

      • Kevin

        Fact: This post looks only at the last quarter, not the campaign as a whole.

        Fact: This poster doesn’t understand campaign finance law, as evidenced by her lack of understanding that in-kind donations are required to be reported.

        Fact: Does anyone care how many office supplies these candidates are buying?

        Fact: What is the meaningless “a proof-positive that is pretty much pot-kettle-black” lack of understanding of grammar and metaphor? poor language skills, unbacked up attacks or all of the above.

        • JC

          You’re just engaging in ad hominem attacks here. Must be because you don’t have a clue about what you’re ranting about, or are too lazy to look up any information yourself and say something intelligent.

          • Jim

            I think what Kevin is trying to say is that the analysis above leaves out the big picture, and that the law says in-kind contributions must be reported.

            • JC

              Do you know what an ad hominem attack is? It sure isn’t anything like you describe.

              You may be trying to reframe the analysis, which you’re more than welcome to do. But Kevin is attacking jhwygirl without saying anything like what you suggest.

            • I didn’t say “In-kind” contributions were illegal – hell, anyone’s that clicked on the link can tell that pretty much isn’t what I’m arguing since the words “In-kind” are printed in bold on every “In-kind” donation.

              The point is that McDonald is taking $2,400 donations from his paid staffers. So are they paid staffers (oddly well-paid congressional primary campaign staffers, I might add) or are they volunteers?

              This stuff isn’t hard to see – and it sticks out like a sore thumb. On the disbursement side you have these people with multiple disbursements (paychecks) and on the receipts side, you have their “In-kind” donations there in bold.

              That “In-kind” amount of $9,500 makes a significant difference in the last quarter fundraising totals for McDonald.

              Then when you factor money on hand – Gernant has a bit more – it’s fair to say (at the very very least) that some steam appears to be seeping from the McDonald campaign.

              IMNSHO, I guess.

              • Sheet Looker

                Gernants sheets also show him taking major donations from paid staffers. Individuals listed as Berringer, Kosted, and others fit this description. The sheets also have Gernant accepting multiple donations from himself, including a personal loan he financed through the campaign account. He also paid himself rent from the campaign account for a property that he actually owns. So, J-girl both parties have been fudging their fundraising numbers.

              • Corey

                Now that’s stupid. Most candidates don’t even recoop their own travel costs. Pay himself rent for space he owns??? Wow. This kid has no chance.

              • Kosted did NOT “In-kind” donate…and doesn’t look like he’s much of a staffer, considering he’s only collected 4 paychecks over 4 reporting quarters…far different than the disbursement/receipt matches on McDonald’s side.

                Berringer, far as I know, would have a pretty hard time being a staffer since he isn’t even in Montana…and Gernant has an office in downtown Missoula, under his name…so he kinda HAS TO “In-kind” that, otherwise he’d be breaking the law.

                So – let me repeat – taking “In-kind” donations from staffers is the issue I’m saying looks funky. I stand by my comments here and Left in the West

              • Sheet Looker

                Jgirl, the rent was paid for his home address it s listed in the july report. Not for a downtown location. And not in-kinded, as you suggested.

                Him giving himself an $1800 loan from the campaign account is a separate issue, but is in that report from july.

                it is in the website

              • Jess Wandering


              • You are impossibly dense. Either it is intentional, or…well, let me just say that it brings into picture the fact that our education system apparently failed you.

                Did you miss the part in my post where I go over who loaned how much to their campaigns?

                You call yourself a sheet looker? You can’t even read.

                Under “Loans“, there is a loan – and if you actually read it, there is a loan (which reads “Source:Tyler Gernant Personal funds”. This means – that the “source” was Tyler Gernant, which means he loaned his campaign, not the other way.)

                I reported this above.

                Gernant has loaned a total of $1,814 to his campaign, back in July – while McDonald has loaned his campaign much more significantly – as I state above.

                McDonald has loaned himself, in 4 separate loans in just the last reporting quarter, $9,835, plus another $1,000, which is dated 1/1/09.

                So, once again, I stand by my post and my comments here and at LitW.

              • Sheet Looker

                Jgirl, no need for name calling, and I might say the same thing to you.

                You’re not reading very well yourself; we agree on the loan. You may have misread what I wrote.

                I just thought is was a little green to loan his campaign money, and then just pay it back to himself in rent for his home address–not the downtown address as you ‘reported.’

                Jgirl, im noticing you do a good job of going overboard with an incorrect point, and then skirting over it by name calling or changing the issue

                here you have done both

              • Twohundertseventy

                Hey, replying to you here because the string got so skinny downthread that there isn’t even a reply button.

                Nathan Kosted was actually Tyler’s campaign director in the very beginning, up until about last June, and Daren Berringer is a political consultant of his.

                So Sheet Looker is absolutely correct.

  3. Jim

    Momentum? that’s a good one. you people crack me up.

  4. Corey

    Wow, I really was hoping someone would write about how many paperclips each candidate had on hand. Great work you!

    Aren’t you embarrassed to take these pathetic supposed “gotcha” point directly from the Gernant campaign and post them as “analysis”?

    You seem to miss the point entirely that CG made about TV spots.

    • That’s rich Corey, in a moronic kind of way.

      You seem to miss the point entirely that CG made about TV spots.

      Yeah, funny how she missed that considering jhwygirl’s post was made on Sunday afternoon, and MT Cowgirl’s ‘point’ about TV was left at 7:03 this morning … less than 15 minutes before you left your bullshit comment here, in fact. Coincidence? I think not. The one who should be embarrassed, Corey, is you.

  5. Before the Democratic circular firing squad gets the order to fire, it might be a good idea to read this.

  6. cynic

    “I didn’t know Montana grew sugar cane”-

    Proof positive that j-girl thinks Montana disappears outside of Missoula.

  7. Cogent analysis of the campaign finance system, I must say, with candidates from both parties accepting bribes and each sniping at the other about how some of them are better than others.

    Sugar money is green, people. It buys ad time. The candidate with the best ads will win.

    That’s American politics 101.

  8. Still don’t rate my own comments.

  9. problembear

    zzzzzzzzz snort snortzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,675,945 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,737 other followers

  • April 2010
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

%d bloggers like this: