This is truly rich. Mitt Romney is running for President and one of the qualifications he claims is his superior business acumen. One thing I distinctly remember from the 2008 campaign is then candidate Obama, when asked what his qualifications for running anything were, responded by saying that we should just watch how he runs his campaign. I have already read several diaries about the fact that the Obama 2012 Campaign operation is superior to the Obama 2008 campaign.

So should Mitt Romney hold his campaign up as an example of his ability to lead an operation? According to this Los Angeles Times article, not so much.

But the president appears to be getting a much bigger bang for his buck.

According to an analysis by the Times Data Desk, part of the Los Angeles Times, the Obama campaign had 901 people on its payroll last month, and paid them a median salary of $3,074 a month, or $36,886 a year.

The Romney campaign, in contrast, had 403 people on its payroll, and paid them a median salary of $6,437 in August, which would mean $77,250 a year.


The disparity in the two campaigns’ compensation packages underscores a key difference in their strategic approach.

Much of Obama’s campaign staff consists of on-the-ground organizers deployed around the country early this year as part of a field program designed to identify and register Obama voters, and ultimately get them to cast ballots.

The Romney campaign has taken a different tack. It is relying on the Republican National Committee for the bulk of its voter registration and mobilization program this fall.

Obama campaign had twice the staff as Romney last month at same cost

If it wasn't bad enough that Mitt Romney's business experience at Bain Capital was one of destroying businesses that somebody else built and devastating the lives of the workers who helped to build the business, now we get confirmation that he's not so good at running a campaign either.

Originally posted to hungrycoyote on Mon Sep 24, 2012 at 11:51 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.