"The Liberals, unlike ourselves and the Conservatives, have not expanded their base for the smaller donations, the $100 to $200 or $300 ones," [Comartin] said. "The candidates are part of the same problem, because they never developed that capacity to do that."
He argued the Liberals also have a history of extravagant spending.
"The Liberals, as a party, as individuals, have this expectation of grandiose events and they spend a heck of a lot more on their campaign than even our winning candidates do in the NDP," he said. "I think there's a change of culture that's needed within that party."
Joe Comartin should learn a couple of things, here:
1. The NDP have been outraised by the Liberals in the <$200 category, through more donors, since 2009, minus a close race in Q4 of 2009 and Q1 of 2010 - that's a total 7 of 9 quarters since 2009, so, shut up
2. We're still both hilariously behind the Conservatives, so don't try and put yourself in the same boat
Now, this may change in the future due to the election results, but Mr. Comartin has clearly not read the fundraising statements of the past couple of years if he's saying what he's saying. That's OK, I don't expect much from Comartin anyways, as his Windsor West geographical seat mate Brian Masse is 10x more cooler than him, and we all know how hard it is to measure up.
Now, I'm not saying there isn't a tendency of the Liberal Party to rely a bit too much on large donors; we do rely on them more than other parties. However, that being said, our small donors are still more plentiful than the NDP's small donors, at least up until the first quarter of this year. Also, they don't have too many large donors, meaning even when they do have an advantage in small donors, as they did in the Q-4 and Q-1 I mentioned, they were still outraised overall by the Liberals, thanks to their large donors coming through.
Want to see how silly it is of Comartin to wander into another party's election finances without doing his homework? Courtesy of Pundit's Guides data, you can look for yourself.
As to Comartin's second claim, he's also out a step or two; for example, in 2008 (the last election year we have financial data for), Comartin spent $64,758 on his re-election bid, which he won with 48.7% of the vote.
In a similar situation on Don Valley East, winning candidate Yasmin Ratansi spent $67,121 on her re-election bid, and won 48.1% of the vote in a closer race.
Another example, winning candidate in Ottawa Centre, Paul Dewar, spent $74,532 on his re-election bid in 2008, and came up with 39.7% of the vote, while across the river in Hull-Aylmer, Liberal incumbent Marcel Proulx spent $79,056, and came with 37.5% of the vote.
I'm sure if I found more examples, you'd see very little variation from incumbent to incumbent, except in extraordinary circumstances. You can make an argument that the Liberals may spend a few thousand more on their winning ridings, but that's not exactly a big difference in the grand scheme of things, is it?
So, in conclusion, Joe Comartin is either ignorant or lying. And now he's in the Official Opposition! Yay!