Obama To Beat Clinton In Second Quarter Fundraising

[ariesgem]

The Huffington Post has learned from sources close to both candidates that the Obama campaign will surpass the Clinton campaign in second quarter fundraising. "It's a matter of pure mathematics," an Obama fundraiser told HuffPost. "We had 104,000 donors in the first quarter; Clinton had 60,000. And while 75 percent of Hillary's contributors had maxed out, only 50 percent of ours had. So we had had a lot more potential to grow -- and we did." The fundraising period for this quarter ends on June 30, and campaigns have until July 15 to disclose their numbers. "Even though there are over three weeks left," a Clinton source told HuffPost, "it will be next to impossible for us to make up the difference. The machine we have at the $2,300 level is a superior machine, but the Obama campaign continues to beat us with small donors and on the Internet."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/06/06/obama-to-beat-clinton-in-_n_51038.html

:bounce:

[illinoisprogressive]

1. I am one of those small donors helping Obama kick

[Herman Munster]

2. welll

the obama campaign has denied this report.

[JeffR]

3. I wish I hadn't lived to see the day when fundraising prowess is equated

with electoral viability. He might get my primary vote, though I doubt it. She will not get my primary vote under any circumstances. If either of them wins the nomination, they can take my vote to the bank. But that's all either of them gets from me, other than my best wishes.

[MonkeyFunk]

4. "lived to see the day"?

Was there a time in your life when that wasn't the case?

[JeffR]

Never to this degree

It would be naive to think money hasn't always made politics go 'round. But it pains me to see fundraising adduced as some measure of worth, especially here on DU. It's always been revolting, but it's more revolting every cycle.

[ludwigb]

9. I Feel Ya

But support and good will are cheap...money on the other hand is something people give when they are serious. Howard Dean didn't outraise his opponents in 2004 because he was a corporate whore promising everything to everybody. Dean raised tons of cash because lots of people were motivated and inspired enough to contribute.

If Obama can raise lots of money from a wide variety of sources at this early juncture, it definitely does say something about his appeal.

Anyway I welcome this news because I'd like to see how Obama reacts to being "the frontrunner" and whether we'll get a wiff of whatever the GOP is planning to attack him with.

[Bullet1987]

10. I think Hillary will still be seen as the frontrunner even if he makes more than her

this go around...

[snowbear]

14. the best part of your response was saying.......

........ "you think" (So, in other words, you're not sure. None of us are)

GoBAMA!

[Bullet1987]

15. I wouldn't want Obama to be seen as the frontrunner...not yet anyway.

[karynnj]

19. I agree and I think that there are examples

where the most highly funded candidate lost. Kerry had to mortgage his house in December 2003 to get enough money to compete in Iowa. Both Clark and Dean outraised him in the last quarter of 2003. (I think Edwards may have as well.) Jimmy Carter won Iowa with very little money in 1976.

It is true that the candidate with the most money usually wins. Sometimes that is because the money flows to them after it is clear that they are the likely winner.

[MGKrebs]

29. Raising the money is a big test, but spending it wisely

is the other half of that equation.
Obama seems to be doing most everything right so far.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

5. Good news! Anybody but Clinton

:bounce:

[bjnumb9]

6. ditto

on that hope

[TeamJordan23]

7. Hillary raising a good bulk of money from lobbyists

Good to sea Obama's money coming mostly from normal people.

[Bullet1987]

8. We need money out of politics!!!

[MonkeyFunk]

11. never gonna happen

ever.

[rinsd]

26. Hillary got less than1% of her total from the 1st Q from lobbyists.

[AtomicKitten]

12. Great news.

Obama just needs to keep getting out there and talking to people and setting himself apart from the herd.

[Colobo]

13. TIME TO DONATE AGAIN!!! WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

[andykef]

16. BAD NEWS, NO REALLY IT IS!

This is terrible news. Once again the Democratic Party is in danger of nominating a loser. This smells like the excitment created by Dean in '04, even the passionate support for McGovern in 1972.
Obama might be the darling of the Democratic grassroots but these are not the people who decide Presidential Elections.
These people are unlikely to vote for Obama in the current climate of fear where experience is paramount and to be honest a lot of red states will not vote for him on grounds of race alone.
Reality check is needed. In the same way a Dean could not win in '04 Obama cannot win as top of the ticket in '08.
Don't get me wrong Clinton will find it difficult to unite the country as well and I do not think that Obama is a terrible candidate. I just think that GORE/OBAMA is much better. GORE can win.

[Odin2005]

23. What a load of anti-netroots bull.

Go away you concern troll. :grr:

[GreenTea]

17. They keep shoving them two down our throats! We must vote Hillary or Obama....

No one else will do they tell us...Only Obama or Hillary....The world will only be safe with one of them...And the Republicans can only grin..

[Dawgs]

18. I've been an Obama supporter for a long time.

The media had nothing to do with it. Unless you know what every other Hillary or Obama supporter thinks, you need to drop this desperate talking point.

[Colobo]

24. You are right: Only Obama....

[ElizabethDC]

20. Obama's people are denying this (NYT)

From the NYT: "But last night, the Huffington Post blog, citing anonymous sources close to both candidates, said Mr. Obama would out-raise Mrs. Clinton in the second quarter. An Obama spokesman denied the report."

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/07/us/politics/07clinton.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Of course, they could just be trying to lower expectations, so who knows?

[wyldwolf]

21. The Obama people are lowering expectations. The Clinton team are raising them

Clinton's people say Obama could raise $40 mill. Obama's teams says they'll be happy with 20 mill.

[ElizabethDC]

22. Yep, and Hillary's team are trying to lower their own expectations

in the above link from the NYT, it talks about how Hillary's fundraising this quarter has had mixed results, but then it says this:

"The document, dated May 17, was provided to The New York Times by an uncommitted Democrat who is not affiliated with any presidential campaign. The Clinton campaign said the document was authentic, and declined to say how it got out, or even if the campaign had leaked the information as a way to set fund-raising expectations for the June 30 deadline for campaign finance reporting."

So, one can easily guess what they're all trying to do.

[Colobo]

25. Very interesting!

[rinsd]

27. Either way, holy shit! At least another $20M a piece!

[mckeown1128]

28. This is great news!!!

The money will not make him the front runner (see Romney) so he still will not be attacked for now. It will though change the polls shortly before the primaries (when 85 percent of the voters decide.) Hillary's lead will disappear once Obama and Edwards start campaigning and advertising in more states and people learn who they are (see name recognition Iowa = Edwards.)