Obama vs. Clinton: Why They Have Equal Funds, But Unequal Poll Results
Forget the outrageous headline hype and equally misleading campaign spin about 2008 fundraising.
The candidates' third quarter 2007 Federal Election Commission reports were filed last night, and the facts are in: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have raised exactly the same amount of campaign funds, to date.
As of September 30, 2007, and once accounting gimmicks have been eliminated, the Democratic candidates for the presidency have raised, to date:
- Barack Obama - $78,915,507
- Hillary Clinton - $78,615,215
- John Edwards - $29,935,179
- Bill Richardson - $18,461,022
- Chris Dodd - $8,761,581
- Joe Biden - $6,172,060
- Dennis Kucinich - $2,128,615
For full info, see Democratic 2008 Fundraising Statistics & Donor Info. It's an interesting read...
Money alone can't win a presidential campaign, but lack of money can certainly lose one.
Barring catastrophes or miracles, Richardson, Dodd, Biden and Kucinich simply don't have the funds to compete in the 2008 Democratic race for the presidential nomination.
The Edwards Campaign: Crippled, But Not Dead
John Edwards can barely keep pace with Clinton and Obama. Having generated only 37% of funds raised by either of the top two candidates, Edwards recently relented, and agreed to accept public campaign financing, which means that he legally may not spend more than $50 million on his primary campaigns.... considerably less than Obama and Clinton.
No matter how cleverly the Edwards campaign spins it, John Edwards is at a major disadvantage. For instance, Edwards' primary-race spending limit in New Hampshire will now be $818,000, which renders his efforts to win that state almost futile.
If Edwards continues to spend funds at his third quarter 2007 rate, he would be out of money in January 2008. Without a win in the Janary 5, 2008 Iowa caucus, the Edwards campaign is likely dead.
The good news for the Edwards campaign is that John Edwards is a close contender to win the Iowa caucus. And this morning, I received an email from the Edwards campaign, trumpeting:
"In 10 key states (Iowa, California, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Idaho, Ohio, West Virginia, Michigan and Minnesota), the state councils of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) endorsed John Edwards for president."That means more than 930,000 members of the fastest growing union in North America believe John is the candidate who will bring real change to America -- and they will be working on the ground to elect him president."
The bottom line in October 2007: The Edwards campaign is alive and kicking, but the odds are strongly against his winning the party nomination. Most pundits dismiss the possibility.
Obama and Clinton: Equal Funds, Unequal Polls
I watched Hillary Clinton in her appearance yesterday on ABC's daytime talk fest The View.
In a word: she was spectacular. She was articulate, warm, competent, accessible, intelligent, strong. Even relaxed and authentic.... like a friend with whom I coud share a cup of Starbucks. And yet, dignified and presidential.
And my thought was: How can staid Barack Obama ever compete with this genuinely likeable, wholly admirable Hillary Clinton?
Truth is, I'm not sure he can, any longer, for the 2008 contest. Sadly, it might be too late...
Barack Obama has talked too much about himself , he's talked too much about the process of politics (Who actually cares?), and he's talked too much in intellectual phrases meaningless to most Americans.
In contrast, Hillary Clinton specifically addresses how she plans to help people in their daily lives and needs. And she does it in the form of concrete, understandable, pragmatic plans. Not in inside-the-beltway concepts and bland platitudes.
And that's why, despite having raised equal funds, Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama in every poll, national, state and local.
Can Obama still win the 2008 Democratic nomination?
Absolutely YES. If he wants to, Sen. Obama has the massive campaign chest to change the course of this 2008 primary season. But to do so, he must radically alter his white-glove campaign strategy. (And stop looking so stressed out... )
A win in the Iowa caucus would ignite the Obama campaign. And Senator Obama apparently knows that: he was seen going to door-to-door in Des Moines this past weekend for the first time... a refreshing change for a candidate who has often sequestered himself while on the campaign trail.
Obama and Clinton are in a statistical tie in Iowa, and any of the top three contenders could prevail. (See Clinton vs. Obama: The Iowa Niceness Factor.)
A loss in Iowa for Hillary would not be devastating, as she'll surely roll on to victory in Clinton-friendly New Hampshire. But an Iowa loss could prove to be a sharp, sobering setback to her campaign.
An Iowa loss for Barack Obama would probably spell the beginning of the end for his 2008 White House ambitions.
The thing is this: like George Bailey, the Jimmy Stewart lead in the beloved classic film "It's a Wonderful Life," Barack Obama has everything he needs to change the course of his destiny.
He apparently just needs to wake up, and realize it. Will he? I honestly don't know, and won't guess.
This I do know: with opposition as formidable as Hillary Clinton, aided by her brilliant political strategist husband, Barack Obama has NO chance to win the 2008 Democratic nomination without dramatic change in his campaign.
(Photo taken on Oct 4, 2007: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Related Reading
Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: The Iowa Niceness Factor
The Boston Globe, Sept 28, 2007: In shift, Edwards agrees to accept public funds
Comments
If a war whore like Hitlary is wholly admirable, I’m in the wrong wing of the political spectrum. She is being fawned over by the media including such hawks as Fred Barnes and Rich Lowrey. That’s an indication of who she appeals to.
Hello,
You sounded like a HIllary supporter. I was also surprised when you said Barack Obama is talking about our politics in intellectual way, which does not make sense for American people. WEll, I do undesrtand that it may not make sense to you, but the American people responded to his message with unmistakable sign – with their pocket money. A not well known Senator from Illinois, burt into the national seen in 2004, and he managed to out pace and out raise Hillary clinton ( Obama = 72 million, Hillary 62 million + 10 milliion fund transfered from her 2006 Senate race)) Period. Sen Obama has outdone her and Her Husbands formidable machine. Now, if he can win the IOWA Caucus, Hillary clinton will be history!
American People want to turn the page! Bye Bye Billary!
Welcome OBAMA.
Daniel,
That you are able to write this obviously bias drivel that reads like an eight grader voting for her best freind is sad…
Hillary reminds me of Margaret Thatcher: militaristic, out-doing her male competitors with aggression. That sweeter-than-sugar yacking might have worked when we weren’t in two wars and facing a third – it doesn’t fly now. If you want an anti-intellectual leading the free world now, I feel sorry for you. If you want someone with military arms lobbyists lining her pockets because you think she’s sweet and friendly, try to remember that when your sons and daughters are dragged off to war. Hillary’’s a foreign policy disaster unless her belligerence is a total act, and if it’s an act, who would I really be voting for? I know who Obama is, what he stands for, what he’ll do to end the stalemate in the Middle East, to improve our status internationally, to make life more fair right here, right now for regular people like me. Hillary’s for corporations, full stop.
Daniel-
Actually, I’ve long been an Obama supporter, and have rooted for Obama every step of the way.
For your info, take a look at this compendium of my writings on Obama vs. Clinton:
http://usliberals.about.com/od/electionreform/a/ObamaorClinton.htm
But the truth is that the four top Democratic contenders would all make outstanding presidents. And the Democratic party is fortunate to have such a superb slate of presidential candidates for 2008.
Obama went door to door before. A couple of months back in Iowa. He had a picture on his website showing him on a family front porch. The Man of the house agreed to vote for Obama because he took the time to come to his house. The guy was actually barbecuing in his back yard. Therefore all the family and friends visiting came out on the front porch to talk to Obama.
Reading you I am reminded of the brain dead of the beltway pundits gushing all over themselves about Hillary, her tired old ways, dull thinking while sweeping away her ethical problems and the fact that most in her own party simply do not like her.
I also see that like the brain dead in Washington, you are threatened by a man who is energetic, exciting and has new ideas and is clearly a superior candidate to Clinton. He is also someone who is honest and has integrity.
Of course, this is something that is a threat to the pundits who are so afraid of change and the new they would rather watch their country slide in the abyss than to change the failures of the past two presidents and their policies. Sort of like the last days of Rome.
or the decandent empires before WWI.
So, desperately you lash out with snarky remarks of the change agent while touting the one who symbolizes all the failures of a generation that led us to this sorry state.
Chery-
I love that story about Sen. Obama. I hope he does much more of that, especially in Iowa. Sometimes, when he’s muted by the advice of his staff and consultants, I feel like his essential message and decency are smothered. More direct, warm contact with the public shows Obama off at his best.
vwcat-
My comments about Sen. Obama are not snarky. They are the objective truth.
Below are a few links of my running analysis of Obama vs. Clinton which you may find interesting:
Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: The Iowa Niceness Factor
http://usliberals.about.com/b/a/257948.htm
Obama Evokes Ronald Reagan Values in Response to Clinton Foreign Policy Gaffe
http://usliberals.about.com/b/a/257924.htm
The Obama-Clinton ‘08 Duel – Differences in Connecting with Voters
http://usliberals.about.com/b/a/257908.htm
Deborah
Just curious how you came to your conclusion. Perhaps it’s more likely that the people supporting Obama are not the same demographic as in the polls. Which is why he continues to raise the same amounts of cash as Hillary but appears so far behind. Perhaps it’s time you wake up.
I am a republican voter and I voted for Nader and I would vote for Obama in this election, But NO WAY will I vote for Clinton. The Democrats try to shove someone down our throats like Clinton and cry foul play win they lose.
WAKE UP Already!
Obama is more prepared to make better judgments.
And yes, he speaks in intellectual phrases and speaks too much about politics that is why people care.
Your article is just pathetic.
You are definitley a fan of LIAR-ry I mean Hillary, but who wants a president that lies about stuff on international tv. So you need to wake up and smell the roses because we need change and OBAMA is going to do just that.