Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 to Obama

[Beet]

Published by Luke Rosiak on August 14, 2008 9:52 AM  | Permalink  | Comments (6)

During World War II, soldiers crouching in foxholes penned letters assuring their sweethearts that they'd be home soon. Now, between firefights in the Iraqi desert, some infantrymen have been sending a different kind of mail stateside: two or three hundred dollars -- or whatever they can spare -- towards a presidential election that could very well determine just how soon they come home.

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.

Note the numbers here are very, very small, but still large enough not to be a fluke. And very surprising.

Troops Deployed Abroad
Obama, Barack    $60,642    134
Paul, Ron         $45,512         99
McCain, John       $10,665       26

All Military
Obama, Barack    $335,536    859
McCain, John    $280,513    558
Paul, Ron    $232,411    537
Clinton, Hillary    $167,050    376
Republican National Cmte    $135,902    219
Huckabee, Mike    $66,751    127
Thompson, Fred    $46,400    93
Romney, Mitt    $43,307    96
Giuliani, Rudolph W    $22,050    47
National Republican Senatorial Cmte    $21,885    26
DNC Services Corp    $16,873    53

In 2000, Republican George W. Bush outraised Democrat Al Gore among military personnel almost 2 to 1. In 2004, with the Iraq war underway, John Kerry closed the gap with President Bush, but Bush still raised $1.50 from the military for every $1 his Democratic opponent collected.

[Beet]

This is close to the ultimate in meaningless data I would think.

Really, based on the last two elections, I would have expected a big McCain advantage.

[Beet]

This is close to the ultimate in meaningless data I would think.

Really, based on the last two elections, I would have expected a big McCain advantage.

With these de minimus numbers?

Yup. The numbers are small, but not small enough to be a fluke. Based on the giving patterns in 2000 and 2004, and McCain's background, I would have expected this to be a very heavy McCain year. The Ron Paul numbers also are pretty indicative.