Primaried House Republicans: Latest Financial Reports



How are the primaried House Republican incumbents faring in the battle for their seats? Very well, thank you. The reports for the January 1, 2014 to January 23, 2014 period show the incumbents outraising and outspending their primary election challengers. They also overwhelm them in cash-on-hand. The figures are in the table below: 

30 Days Prior to Election Report 1/1/14 to 1/23/14
30 Days Prior to Election Report 1/1/14 to 1/23/14
District
Incumbent
Raised
Loans
Expenditures
COH
Challenger
Raised
Loans
Expenditures
COH
1
George Lavender
$5,400

$25,394
$80,058
Gary VanDeaver
$5,000
$3,674
$10,951
4
Lance Gooden
$23,725

$49,675
$51,189
Stuart Spitzer
$350
$16,062
$7,583
6
Matt Schaeffer
$24,255
$29,737
$44,100
Skip Ogle
$56,175
$92,412
$28,368
8
Byron Cook
$22,000
$33,535
$639,039
Bobby Vickery
$0
$0
$7,743
11
Travis Clardy
$24,906
$60,000
$20,388
$85,701
Tony Sevilla
$300
$275
$25
12
Kyle Kacal
$6,400
$9,732
$55,495
Timothy Delasandro
$4,007
$2,974
$2,210
18
John Otto
$73,674
$15,084
$530,460
Terry Holcomb
$2,995
$3,860
$1,414
55
Ralph Sheffield
$13,250
$57,763
$92,843
Molly S. White
$9,370
$955
$7,081
59
J.D. Sheffield
$40,501
$55,586
$27,638
$103,276
Danny Pelton
$5,792
$191
$12,327






Howard Ray
$1,500
$907
$568
60
Jim Keffer
$48,015
$71,375
$330,341
Cullen Crisp
$15,215
$25,000
$26,664
$30,215
64
Myra Crownover
$7,600
$25,456
$203,095
Read King
$3,832
$5,521
$5,262
71
Susan King
$2,579
$15,301
$495,112
Issac M. Castro
$3,605
$725
$7,705
72
Drew Darby
$26,368
$11,367
$538,034
Shannon Thomason
$945
$1,255
$448
83
Charles Perry
$71,370
$97,042
$88,433
Steve Massengale
$17,700
$50,000
$6,255
$78,428
92
Jonathan Strickland
$49,228
$125,000
$141,647
$127,040
Andy Cargile
$37,104
$15,000
$26,784
$5,386
94
Diane Patrick
$13,657
$37,404
$75,032
Tony Tinderholt
$10,100
$10,798
$11,774
$9,600
102
Stefani Carter
$44,396
$89,617
$133,459
Adryana Boyle
$10,280
$5,987
$0






Sam Brown
$21,490
$34,398
$19,573






Linda Koop
$7,335
$21,676
$38,634
105
Linda Harper Brown
$43,530
$50,447
$30,074
$59,135
Rodney Anderson
$1,511
$70,000
$2,469
$73,669
112
Angie Chen Button
$16,240
$13,774
$405,099
Jared Patterson
$5,195
$10,947
$10,602
115
Bennett Ratliff
$44,225
$80,000
$35,498
$188,037
Matt Rinaldi
$16,926
$26,408
$21,742
$13,263
134
Sarah Davis
$19,529
$56,449
$169,698
Bonnie Parker
$1,800
$20,000
$3,297
$9,183
150
Debbie Riddle
$6,250
$5,475
$62,584
Tony Noun
$0
$110,000
$10,262
$33,228

AVERAGE
$28,504
$74,207
$40,883
$207,148

$9,541
$36,356
$12,443
$16,539

On average, incumbents raised three times what challengers raised in contributions during the reporting period. Incumbents also spent three times what challengers spent during the period. Several incumbents had large outstanding loans—Strickland, Ratliff, Clardy, J.D. Sheffield, and Harper Brown. Among the challengers, Noun and Anderson had large outstanding loans.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whither the Republican Party?

Jonathan Rauch and Benjamin Wittes write in The Atlantic magazine: So we arrive at a syllogism: (1) The GOP has become the party of Trumpism. (2) Trumpism is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. (3) The Republican Party is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law. A syllogism is, according to dictionary.com: 1. Logic. an argument the conclusion of which is supported by two premises, of which one (major premise) contains the term (major term) that is the predicate of the conclusion, and the other (minor premise) contains the term (minor term) that is the subject of the conclusion; common to both premises is a term (middle term) that is excluded from the conclusion. A typical form is “All A is C; all B is A; therefore, all B is C.”. 2. deductive reasoning. 3. an extremely subtle, sophisticated, or deceptive argument. Which definition applies here?   First, has the GOP become the party of Trump? Has he taken control of the party appa...
Read more

Choices for the Final Four (ICRC Commissions, that is)

Image
With four commission positions remaining to be filled, whom should the commissioners select? The commissioners should choose an African American male from TCCC precinct 1. Since the greatest concentrations of African Americans are located in TCCC precinct 1 (see this map ), choosing an African American from this geographic area would provide the greatest voice to the area with the highest concentration of African Americans in the city and the area that would most likely be included in a council district that would possess a plurality of African Americans. The choice should Nathaniel Bradford because of his connections to the community. An Anglo male and an Anglo female should be chosen from TCCC precinct 2. One, if not both, should be chosen from those voter precincts slightly east and west of MOPAC that featured high voter turnout in the 2012 mayoral election (see this map ). The male and female from those voting precincts who the ARP considered the most qualified are He...
Read more

In Defense of a Theory

I’m a big fan of political scientist Seth Masket, but what he wrote in defense of the theory of presidential nominations expounded in The Party Decides intrigues me. First, he notes that his initial defense caused some blowback: Last week at Mischiefs of Faction , I wrote about the book The Party Decides and the extent to which the 2016 is causing trouble for it. I argued that the Republican race isn't providing a very clean test of the theory, while the Democratic race is. This invited substantial pushback from Jonathan Chait , Justin Grimmer , and others, suggesting that I was either protecting the theory from actual testing, or that the theory itself was untestable. So I'd like to clarify a bit and suggest just what evidence we've gathered this year. Then, he goes on to explain more fully: Now, in my recent post, I focused on what I see as the central claim of the book: The party generally gets what it wants. That is, when party elites have selected a...
Read more