They came from poor people like myself who sent in 20 or 50 or 100 dollars, many of them making their first ever contributions to a candidate. If you want to find quid pro quo, go to Chappaqua. We contribute to candidates and organizations for the same reasons - they share a philosophy or an agenda that we wish to advance. Not all philosophies and agendas receive the same amount of support, but they do receive the amount of support they deserve so long as this support is not regulated by government. An unpopular idea does not deserve the same amount of airtime as a popular one.
Good ideas rise to the top without help from the government.
The problem with this country right now is that bad ideas are given life preservers at taxpayer expense. Imagine the mortality rate if cancerous and diseased tissues were given the same assistance as cancerous and diseased ideologies are in the country. My point is this - in a free society, healthy debate of issues must not be regulated, nor should the resources necessary to facilitate it. Campaign finance reform promotes the opposite of what its supporters desire. It will limit the ability of individuals and organization to promote their agendas as they are forced to operate within nonsensical budgets forced upon them by bureaucrats.