So the media blasted the Hillary campaign when reports surfaced that it spent $1,200 in a single month at Dunkin’ Donuts. That’s a lot of coffee for the campaign, or a lot of doughnuts for Bill Clinton. At the time, Gerard Baker wrote a brilliant article about what coffee preferences revealed about the Democratic primary:
No one has taken the Obama campaign to task for its coffee expenditures, but in absolute terms it is certainly in excess of the Hillary campaign’s. Given all the wasteful spending by the Obama campaign, it is hardly a surprise that its coffee expenditures are, shall we say, lofty. Before its June report was filed, the Obama campaign had spent about $1,800 at Starbucks and $1,400 at Dunkin Donuts. The McCain campaign, on the other hand, has spent a mere $498 at Starbucks and $970 at Dunkin’ Donuts. It is also well known the Straight Talk Express is stocked with Dunkin’ Donuts coffee. If coffee is a heuristic for the presidential election, the McCain campaign is in good shape. While Starbucks is in the process of closing 600 locations, Dunkin’ Donuts is opening dozens. Because Americans are pessimistic about the economy, they’re more likely to spend only a buck or two on a cup of coffee than they are to splurge on the mocha chip frappuccino. There is also some dignity in being able to say small, medium, or large as opposed to tall, grande, or venti. Customer surveys also show that Dunkin’ Donuts is out pacing Starbucks for the first time in years. But if everything is so bad for Starbucks, how did Obama manage to win the primary? Well, fortunately liberal elitists who have money to burn compose a smaller percentage of the overall population than the Democratic Party. Petite vanilla scones are to Obama what the bear claw is to McCain, and Americans are going to choose the latter.
