Washington – The first-quarter fundraising reports from the 2008 presidential campaign crystallized two realities of this intensely fought election: The battle for each party’s nomination is more open than it was just three months ago, and each contest features three relatively well-funded candidates, with the rest at a disadvantage.
Two common assumptions proved false: that U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, with the most extensive money network in Democratic politics, would blow away her rivals in first-quarter fundraising, and that U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who had spent the previous two years preparing for this campaign, would easily best his Republican rivals.
Instead, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., stunned political observers by raising more for the primaries than Clinton, and McCain’s anemic fundraising and rapid spending left the onetime front- runner on the defensive.
The results also showed that the most potent political fundraising networks of the past two decades – one built by former President Clinton and his wife, the other by President Bush – have splintered.
Many Clinton fundraisers are helping Obama or other Democrats. Bush’s team has divided among the three leading GOP candidates, but many remain on the sidelines.
Many of Bush’s Pioneers and Rangers said they were less than energized by the GOP candidates and would sit out the race until one proved worthy of their support or emerged as a clear front-runner.
Among Democrats, a sense of “Clinton fatigue” has led some major fundraisers to reassess with whom they want to align.
“In the past, early numbers have often anointed a front-runner,” said Ken Mehlman, former chairman of the Republican National Committee and Bush’s 2004 campaign manager. “This time, the early numbers indicate a very dynamic race that could change a lot.”
Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist with long experience in presidential campaigns, said the underlying meaning of the reports is that there will be multiple candidates on each side with enough money to compete fully in states with early caucuses or primaries. He said the nominations will be decided by who runs the smartest campaign, not who has the most money.
“This isn’t just a question of someone being so dominant that their political and financial dominance will lead to victory,” he said.
Insiders pored over the reports Monday, calculating “burn rates” – how rapidly campaigns are spending their money – and bankable cash, and analyzing patterns of contributions, the ratio of big donations to small contributions, and other indicators that might tease out who has the most room for growth or why a contender underperformed.
Almost all of the leading candidates found a statistic or two on which to claim success: Hillary Clinton had the most cash on hand of any candidate, thanks to a $10 million transfer of funds from her Senate campaign. Obama pointed to more than 100,000 donors as a sign of grassroots energy. Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., noted that he raised almost twice as much this quarter as he did four years ago.
Among Republicans, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney ($21 million) was the best first-quarter fundraiser. Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani pointed to his prodigious fundraising in March alone as evidence of his appeal. Only McCain among the top tier found little to cheer in his report – and he has overhauled his finance team in response.
McCain has the most to prove; another weak fundraising quarter could cripple his candidacy.
