April 4, 2007

Obama releases fund raising numbers

In a PR coup, building up the suspense for a few days and successfully ensuring that his figures would command a lot of attention, Barack Obama's campaign today revealed that their first quarter fundraising had brought in $25 million, within a million of top fund raiser of the Democratic field, Hillary Clinton.

Initial reaction among the jabbering class was that this was really amazing.

In terms of sheer piles of cash, the number is indeed huge, and it's very impressive in light of the fact that Obama essentially didn't exist a few years ago in terms of national attention, as well as the fact that he came within a dimes worth of difference to Hillary's total with her extensive and vast political and fundraising network built up over decades.

Comments? Reaction? What does it mean? Or, more likely, does it really mean anything at all?

15 Comments:

At 4/04/2007 11:43 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like Sen. Mike Jacobs, Obama understands that money plays a vital role in politics. Unless YOU are able to raise the necessary funds to get your message out --- YOU will lose!

 
At 4/04/2007 2:04 PM, Anonymous qcexaminer said...

What does it mean? Who knows? If you believe Obama's flack it means "(t)his overwhelming response, in only a few short weeks, shows the hunger for a different kind of politics in this country..." Maybe, but the fact that Obama was able to get over 100,000 individual contributions shows a powerful grassroots appeal and is truly amazing.

On the other hand, in '04 Dr. Dean came from nowhere and not only became the media darling, but also raised the most $$$$, and well, you know the rest.

 
At 4/04/2007 5:28 PM, Blogger UMRBlog said...

It's significant as hell. He's pulleddown 25 fresh money. She's pulled in 14 new and transferred 12 over from a Senate campaign fund.

This is a remarkable performance by him.

OTOH, larger average contributions per giver show an ability to put on a push a the end and she's obviously got the top-enders locked and loaded. That's really handy around Dooper Tuesday.

Continued Success.

 
At 4/04/2007 8:10 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

It means that there are a lot of people out there who have money to piss away. Some are rich and many are small donors. Since they are all for Obama, the thing that they all have in common is that they are very gullible.

I am going to work hard and donate as much money as I can to ensure that Mr. Obama serves out his FULL Senate term, as he agreed to do.

So whaddaya say? Let's get him back on the job for the people of Illinois.

 
At 4/05/2007 7:41 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Thanks for providing reason number one for campaign finance reform.

 
At 4/05/2007 10:55 AM, Blogger Scott said...

I believe that the key point to this is his number of donors. He nearly doubled the amount of donors that Clinton had.

The other major part of that is since most of his donations were small; the donors can donate again (FEC caps donations at $2,300). Also, more of those donations can be used in the primary, instead of having to be split between the primary and the general like the large donations from PACs would have to be.

I'm biased, but I see Obama as the big winner for this quarter. I hate the idea of money making that much of a difference, but until the laws are changed, we have to fight fire with fire.

 
At 4/05/2007 1:09 PM, Anonymous Founding father said...

So you believe that campaigns should be paid for by taxes?

What kind of crazy idea is this?

Raise my taxs so that Obama and Clinton and any crazy that wants government money can run and state his or her wacky views?

I do not think so.

Would you let anyone that wants to run have this money or would you have restrictions?

Who would make the restrictions?

The system is a good system. If you can raise money like Obama then you have the mustard. If not you rightly go down in flames.

If the system was good enough for Abe Lincoln and George Washington then it is good enough for me.

You reformers have wacky ideas!

 
At 4/05/2007 2:49 PM, Blogger Craig said...

Almost 200,000... way to go Dope.

 
At 4/05/2007 4:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Speech is money and money is speech. To limit one is to limit the other."

- Judge Potter Stewart

 
At 4/05/2007 4:50 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Founding father...

Thanks for the yuks. You're killin' me!

 
At 4/05/2007 5:22 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Scott,
Righto...

Obama's individual donors equalled Hilary's total donors and Obama attracted twice as many donors overall.

The fact that most of Obama's contributions were $100 or less also means that these donors are able to donate more at some point in the future, while the large number of maxed out donors Clinton attracted means they're tapped out for the duration.

Particularly impressive was the fact that Obama raised I believe $7 million, or nearly a third of the total from online donations.

 
At 4/10/2007 9:28 PM, Blogger illinidem said...

I do think Obama’s fundraising was amazing, but I think he is still really fighting an uphill battle. He has to begin chipping into Hillary’s number. He is settling around 21% and Hillary has not moved from her 35% number. With Edwards hanging in there, Obama has to bring down her number by confronting her directly on a number of issues.

It does not mean he has to have personal attacks, but there is a chance to define her on a number of issues that would work to his advantage. Hillary is still vulnerable on the war. She can also be susceptible to being a hostage to the corporate appeasers in the DLC. She is susceptible to charges of “blowing with the wind” on a number of other issues as well. Finally, I think you can play the “change” card. I think there is fatigue with the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton dynasty. I have no real proof, just personal opinion

If Obama is going to head down that road, he better be ready to fight though. Hillary is a tough customer who will not sit idly by. She also has the ultimate ATM. She can send Bill out to fund raise while she can hit back on substantive attacks. As positive as the fund raising news is for Obama, I think he has a tough road ahead. Then again, the man is an extremely talented politician and seems to always surpass the conventional wisdom.

 
At 4/11/2007 4:56 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

IlliniDem... well said. I agree on all your points.

Time is certainly on Obama's side, as he has a long period in which to further develop his stances on issues, which he hasn't focused on too heavily so far.

But he has a unique advantage in the money game over Clinton in the respect that he raised essentially the same amount, but from over twice as many donors.

What this means, as has been reported frequently, is that while he still has a donor base of 50,000 people or more that have given $100 or less and can be expected to give more either during the primary or general, Hillary has a smaller base of big money donors who have already maxed out and can't give to her again.

 
At 4/13/2007 5:59 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

I think Hillary is going to sh--- her pants pretty soon if this continues....

 
At 4/14/2007 12:41 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

You mean "pantsuit", of course.

And yes, I'm sure she's come to realize that the easy coronation that many expected isn't going to be the case. There will surely be a hard fought primary.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home