Obama Collects Money for Army of Agitators

How much money does President Obama need for re-election? This question is now being asked often in America. The answers vary from $1 to $1 billion. After filing documents with the Federal Election Commission on Monday, the head of the White House can now attract donors and conduct an advertising campaign. This week, Obama will be seeking support in Pennsylvania and Indiana.

In America, Obama has already been called the billionaire president, meaning that his election fund for 2012 will potentially increase to this unprecedented amount. However, some in the Democratic Party consider that the nine-digit number is already being referenced all too often by the Republicans in order to urge their donors to make more generous contributions. The fact remains, however, that 18 months before the election, Democrats are promoting an aggressive fundraising campaign.

Donors are invited to give the first black leader of the United States’ election fund between $2,500 and $5,000 during primary season and another $2,500 for the general election. It was reported that the president’s leading supporters attract about $350,000 in donations each. As The New York Times reported, at least this year the money will be spent not on TV ads but on recruiting an “army of workers” to mobilize and organize the president’s backers. In the course of the 2008 election campaign Obama relied on small private contributions and managed to collect a record $750 million. A Republican operative remarked, as quoted by Reuters, that “Obama could win if he raises only $1.”

Valery Garbuzov, Deputy Director of the Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies, is certain that the secret to success is not only in the money. There are several factors that favor Obama’s re-election. First is the condition of the economy, which is slowly beginning to recover. The economy is starting to grow and unemployment is declining. The second thing in Obama’s favor is the Republicans themselves. It appears that they are without a clearly defined leader who is really able to compete with Obama, says Garbuzov. Former governors have been suggested. Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, may come forward. But even Gingrich is unlikely to manage such a role.

The argument that Obama’s ratings are falling is frequently heard. Of course, preserving one’s popularity for an entire term is difficult, especially when something needs to be done, not promised. But Obama has generally preserved his popularity. Over 70 percent of Americans look favorably on Obama in the White House, while only 45 to 47 percent of voters unconditionally support his policies. As Valery Garbuzov mentioned, in presidential elections voters usually cast their vote for personality, not policies. “Ronald Reagan was in a similar situation. Personality-wise he was extremely popular, but his conservative policies were rejected by millions of Americans. Nevertheless, he was successfully re-elected. Perhaps such a situation will take place in 2012,” suggested our source.

In any case, Obama isn’t sitting back. Today in Pennsylvania he is addressing voters on the economy and energy. Americans dislike the price of gas, which is close to $4 per gallon. Not long ago, he participated in a discussion on school bullying, and on Monday he sent Vice President Joe Biden to the University of New Hampshire, where he spoke with students and residents about preventing sexual assault.