What is Digg?7 Comments
- whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -2/+6I've had a script pulling down this graphic for a while now. For those who might be interested, here's a table with approximately daily readings. Plus hourly for the last while.
time, total, change since last reading
02/08/08 03:43 PM 340651
02/09/08 12:09 AM 348883 8232
02/10/08 12:15 AM 359434 10551
02/11/08 12:12 AM 381629 22195
02/12/08 12:05 AM 396797 15168
02/13/08 12:58 AM 415318 18521
02/14/08 12:04 AM 434443 19125
02/15/08 12:38 AM 441844 7401
02/16/08 10:52 AM 448178 6334
02/17/08 12:46 AM 451642 3464
02/18/08 12:50 AM 454970 3328
02/19/08 12:42 AM 458754 3784
02/19/08 10:56 PM 466515 7761
02/19/08 11:46 PM 474840 8325
02/20/08 12:50 AM 479707 4867
02/20/08 01:47 AM 480228 521
02/20/08 02:48 AM 484481 4253
02/20/08 03:55 AM 486643 2162
02/20/08 04:46 AM 488741 2098
02/20/08 05:56 AM 490847 2106
02/20/08 06:42 AM 492959 2112
02/20/08 07:48 AM 495284 2325
02/20/08 08:39 AM 495797 513
02/20/08 09:54 AM 500965 5168
02/20/08 11:01 AM 504011 3046 - whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -0/+2Oh yeah, I meant to post the totals for the other two major candidates:
MCCAIN (out of $29,580,582):
Merrill Lynch $155,950
Citigroup Inc $153,362
Blank Rome LLP $141,401
Greenberg Traurig LLP $130,587
Goldman Sachs $85,252
CLINTON (out of $92,246,187):
DLA Piper $471,750
Goldman Sachs $413,361
Morgan Stanley $362,700
Citigroup Inc $350,895
Lehman Brothers $241,870
MITT ROMNEY (out of $46,468,216):
Goldman Sachs $223,925
Merrill Lynch $163,020
Citigroup Inc $162,950
Morgan Stanley $152,050
I think what this shows more than anything else is that some people who work at investment companies have a lot of money. There are also a LOT of people who work for these companies. Those two factors together make it pretty likely that they'd show up in the top 10 list of any major candidate. Each candidate got comparable percentages of their total funding from employees at these companies. If I were a candidate, I would interpret this as there not being a concensus on politics at any of them.
The real money is in the 527 organizations (like the infamous Swiftboaters). You can give unlimited amounts of money to those. The only restrictions is that you can't (legally) coordinate what they do with a candidate. They have to operate completely autonomously. I think if you can show that 527s are the ones doing the dirty work for a campaign and getting results (again, the Swiftboaters), then looking at their funding is pretty important. - whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -1/+3These are not corporations backing him, they are employees who work at the corporations. You could imply that's the same thing, but it's not on the face of it. My employer does not back any candidate, yet I donated to Obama.
Maximum allowed donation for an individual is $2300.
So, let's put those numbers in terms of donors. The first number I'll put is assuming each employee gave $2300. The second will assume each gave $100. That will give you a good range of possible donors, I think. Obama sent out an email saying they have topped 900,000 individual donors. So following the donor estimates, I've put in what % of the total donors would be represented by that range.
Goldman Sachs: 422-4218 - 0.0%-0.5%
UBS: 297-2967 - 0.0%-0.3%
Lehman Brothers: 251-2506 - 0.0%-0.3%
National Amusements: 246-2458 - 0.0%-0.3%
JPMorgan Chase: 241-2408 - 0.0%-0.3%
In other words, even if you assume the worst, these donors represent less than 1% each of his donors. FAR less. The fact of the matter is that Obama has raised a lot of money from a lot of individual donors. That data comes from $75 million worth of donations. Let's look at the percentage these donations are of $75 million:
Goldman Sachs: 0.6%
UBS: 0.4%
Lehman Brothers: 0.3%
National Amusements: 0.3%
JPMorgan Chase: 0.3%
This doesn't seem like very compelling evidence to me. It seems to me that any time you make a list and sort it, someone always has to be at the top. I think you've failed to prove the significance to that, though. - quiznos, on 02/21/2008, -2/+3I just donated for the first time.
- whiledo, on 03/25/2009, -2/+3Further updates:
02/20/08 11:53 AM 506784 2,773
02/20/08 12:50 PM 509674 2,890
02/20/08 01:44 PM 512621 2,947
I'm pretty blown away at the continued rate. Since I started keeping track on 2/8, the highest rate I saw prior to last night was less than 2000 new donors per hour. But he's managing to sustain over 3000 new donors/hr for the last three hours. If you look at just donors/hr (using each hour-ish period and adjusting it to the same rate for an hour), here's that table:
02/19/08 06:56 PM 215
02/19/08 07:44 PM 211
02/19/08 08:46 PM 225
02/19/08 09:40 PM 309
02/19/08 10:56 PM 4,022
02/19/08 11:46 PM 9,990
02/20/08 12:50 AM 4,563
02/20/08 01:47 AM 548
02/20/08 02:48 AM 4,183
02/20/08 03:55 AM 1,936
02/20/08 04:46 AM 2,468
02/20/08 05:56 AM 1,805
02/20/08 06:42 AM 2,755
02/20/08 07:48 AM 2,114
02/20/08 08:39 AM 604
02/20/08 09:54 AM 4,134
02/20/08 11:01 AM 2,728
02/20/08 11:53 AM 3,200
02/20/08 12:50 PM 3,042
02/20/08 01:44 PM 3,274 - Wundur, on 02/21/2008, -3/+1The names of the top 5 US corporations backing Obama speak volumes.
Goldman Sachs - $421,763
UBS - $296,670
Lehman Brothers - $250,630
National Amusements - $245,843
JPMorgan Chase - $240,788 - brokenspatula, on 02/21/2008, -10/+3I CAN SPAM TOO
I CAN SPAM TOO
I CAN SPAM TOO
I CAN SPAM TOO
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is