In an undercard to Joel Ebert's analysis of FEC filings, we see that Marion Michael Rounds continues to backpedal from his earlier claim that he would raise $9 million dollars for his U.S. Senate bid:
Rounds campaign officials said the $9 million figure, however, was not a mandate or an absolute goal; rather it was taken out of context. Rounds campaign political director Jason Glodt said Rounds mentioned it when he was faced with the possibility of running against Rep. Kristi Noem and the possible presence of special interest money that could flow into the race as the election nears [Joel Ebert, "Top Candidates Receive More than $1 Million from Outside South Dakota in Senate Race," Pierre Capital Journal, 2014.01.07].
Let's put Rounds's "nine million dollars" claim back in context. Rep. Noem announced her intention to run for House on June 11, 2013. Rounds put "nine million dollars" in play on June 12, 2013. The next day, Rounds's own spin machine embraced nine million dollars as Rounds' fundraising goal and as one more way to tease Democratic challenger Rick Weiland.
In October, Team Rounds started to back away from their declared goal:
"Across the country we've met our [fundraising] goals, but in Washington, we've not met the goals that we wanted to meet. And you know the PACs have just said, flat out, we’re not getting money in, or you don’t need it,” Rounds said.
Rounds said, however, he'll be able to draw back his fundraising goal for the campaign, down from $9 million to just $7.5-8 million, as outside groups haven't yet come out attacking him and he hasn't had to spend much of his own money to defend himself.
"We assumed that [$9 million goal] based on the possibility of multiple contenders on the Democratic side, multiple super PACs involved in the race, both Republican and Democrat," he said [Alexandra Jaffe, "SD GOP Senate Candidate Mike Rounds Raises over $600K in 3rd Quarter," The Hill: Ballot Box, 2013.10.03].
The October story sounded more plausible than the January story. Noem had nothing to do with Rounds's statement on June 12. David Montgomery took nothing out of context. Rounds set $9 million as his goal. Circumstances haven't developed the way he thought they might (sounds like Mike Rounds's economic development policy), so he is now changing that goal to lower expectations. It's not that hard to be honest, is it, Team Rounds?
It is likely that the GOED/EB-5 Scandal are hampering Rounds fund raising activities in Washington, D.C.?
Money people do not like scandals.
Presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin has said that "money is the poison in the system." Looks like Rounds is the most toxic of the group.
I look forward to a chart showing how people claimed they would raise $A and then they raised $B. I bet Mr. Rhoden cowboys up on that graph like a monkey on a dog while Mr. Nelson and Mr. Rounds are proportionately lacking.
When you see bumper stickers that say 'Proportionately Lacking", you know they are laughing at Rounds and Nelson.
Money is the problem. Money is access. Money is influence. Banksters love rural redstate politicians because they can buy them so inexpensively contrast to politicians in large urban states. That's why the politicians from rural states are the leads in banking, finance, etc., in the congress instead of politicians from say, Wall Street jurisdictions. Buying rural politicians out from under their electorate is a great ROI for the banksters and their apologists.
Auction cry: I gotta nine million dollar bid, now do I hear ten?