From the New York Times article 5 days ago “Romney Beating Obama in a Fight for Wall St. Cash“:
Mitt Romney has raised far more money than Mr. Obama this year from the firms that have been among Wall Street’s top sources of donations for the two candidates.
From the Washington Post article yesterday “Obama still flush with cash from financial sector despite frosty relations“:
Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.
Puzzle Question: What explains the discrepancy? (And which newspaper is being misleading? Surely at least one is.)
I think the difference is:
Mitt Romney … “from the firms that have been among Wall Street’s top sources of donations for the two candidates.”
Mitt Romney raised more money from those firms. Obama raised more money from “the financial and banking sector” overall.
Julian – yes, you’re right I believe. But that explanation still makes the NYT headline misleading. (And the article overall is misleading given that most people are likely to interpret it to mean that Romney beat Obama overall on Wall St., given that that is clearly the relevant issue here).