Spinning the Numbers
We have grown so accustomed to so much "spin" in American political reporting, that it is often difficult to discern the significance of important news developments.  The bias in reporting is compounded by doubts about the objectivity of polling organizations whose owners have political conflicts of interest, or the dubious methodolgy of polling that excludes the mobile generation.  Truth be told, we cannot count on the established media to provide the kind of reporting and analysis that will give the average consumer the context to understand fully what is going on in the current presidential campaign.  For example, I would expect any self-respecting journalists reporting a statement by former Iowa Governor Tom Vilseck, the one-time candidate who later endorsed Hillary Clinton, at least to include in their stories the phrase: "whose campaign debts were paid off by Clinton's supporters".  But that hardly ever happens, and I have never seen the fact mentioned that such donations are not legally counted in Hillary's fundraising total or as a Clinton campaign expenditure.

Spinning the Announcements
When it comes to political fundraising numbers, one would think these are hard to spin.  After all, the legal requirements for quarterly reporting to the FEC provide pretty cut-and-dried numbers that should, on the face of it, tell their own story.  However, at the end of each calendar quarter reporting period this campaign season, we were subjected to subtle twists in the timing and manner in which the leading candidates' campaigns primed our expectations.  After the first quarter, perhaps to gain maximum effect if not to ensure their stunning numbers were accurate, the Obama camp waited several days into April to announce that the candidate had raised almost as much as Hillary.  In the second quarter, the Clinton campaign, presumably to manage her supporters' disappointment and preserve her "inevitability", did not even wait until the close to announce that she had raised $27 million and that they expected Obama to beat this amount.

Hidden in the News
After the actual second quarter amounts became public, most news organizations focused on the gross numbers, Obama's $33 million vs. Clinton's $27.  And Obama himself proudly pointed out that he has received donations from over 250,000 Americans.  The 22% difference in gross receipts and the scope of Obama's grassroots fundraising were impressive.  But these were not really the big news, which most media failed to highlight.  One has to assume that the funds raised to date that are restricted to the general election are meaningless, except as an indicator of how "maxxed out" a candidate's donors are.  So looking only at new primary money in the second quarter, Obama had raised $31 million compared to Clinton's $21 million in similar funds.  That means Obama raised 47% more than his leading opponent, an astounding accomplishment at this early stage in the campaign for an upstart challenging the party establishment's candidate.  

Follow the Grassroots Money
The fundraising data is now available and, while most campaign professionals are not publicizing their analysis, rest assured they are mining the information as you read this.  The amount of information is huge, so I will concentrate on two areas I can knowledgably write about, Vermont and Inside the Beltway.  I have been in Vermont volunteering for Obama this summer.  The amounts raised here are but a tiny fraction of the national take (and Vermont's 23 delegates to the Democratic nomination convention are less than ½% of the total).

Vermont Contributions to 2008 Presidential Candidates
Candidate            Total Raised
Barack Obama               $126,196
Mitt Romney                 $32,650
Hillary Clinton             $21,421
John McCain                 $21,350
Bill Richardson              $8,700
Rudolph W. Giuliani          $8,650
John Edwards                 $8,463
Christopher J. Dodd          $2,800
Dennis J. Kucinich           $2,050
Sam Brownback                $1,500
Tom Tancredo                 $1,200
Ron Paul                     $1,150
Mike Gravel                    $775
Mike Huckabee                  $350
Total to All Candidates:   $237,255

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/presstatetots.asp?State=VT

With $126,196 for Obama out of a total reported for the state of $237.255, Obama has raised more money in Vermont than all other candidates from both parties combined!  So is this accomplishment significant, considering the total is probably less than comes in at most Hollywood cocktail fundraisers?  In the case of Barack Obama we are not talking about the state's favorite son, as Howard Dean was four years ago.  He is also a relative new-comer to the national political scene, from a distant state, whose only recent recorded visit was during the last Senatorial election.  And his campaign has yet to establish an official presence in Vermont.  

What the Experts May Not Know
The other fundraising area I have looked at is the Washington DC capital area.  I am a resident of and voter in Northern Virginia, and as a Foggy Bottom denizen I was forced for too many years to remain a political observer by the Hatch Act (you can learn more about my past in my previous post at http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/7/11/10531/8395#readmore), while living alongside all the pundits inside the Beltway (The metropolitan Washington area has spread out and many of its residents commute.  So, for convenience and because of its ready availability, I will use the opensecrets.com fundraising data for the surrounding region.)

WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV
Hillary Clinton            $5,491,951
Barack Obama            $4,430,628
John McCain            $1,489,151
Mitt Romney            $1,334,562
Rudolph W. Giuliani    $1,072,362
Christopher J. Dodd       $918,000
John Edwards              $645,015
Bill Richardson        $541,162
Joseph R. Biden Jr.      $284,015
Tom Tancredo              $135,454
Jim Gilmore              $109,750
Sam Brownback               $84,513
Tommy Thompson               $43,950
Duncan Hunter               $43,775
Ron Paul               $35,845
Thomas J. Vilsack       $17,000
Mike Huckabee               $15,565
Dennis J. Kucinich        $5,350
Mike Gravel                $2,750
Ralph Nader                  $900

Concentrating on the leading fundraisers, Clinton raised slightly over a million dollars more than Obama in the Washington DC area, almost 24%.  This is not an insignificant difference financially.  However, it appears that despite the mass media's assumption Hillary Clinton has a lock on the Democratic nomination and will likely be the next President, Washington insiders are hedging their bets.  

A Final Cautionary Note
The statistics cited above, for second quarter fundraising, grass roots donors in Vermont or Washington's "conventional wisdom" bets, obviously do not translate directly into electoral outcomes.  But they do reveal that this campaign is very important to a large number of Americans and is breaking with trends in recent Presidential contests.  Recent polls revealed that "none of the above" is currently the number one choice of Republican voters.  And the second quarter filings show that Ron Paul is the top GOP recipient of contributions from those who classify themselves as "military personnel",

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/articles/ron-paul-best-q2-fundraising-from-soldiers.html

long considered a loyal part of the Republican base.  Will these be crossover voters if Paul's candidacy as a Republican wanes?  And who among the Democrats are they most likely to lean to?

There is more than enough to read in the fundraising tea leaves to recommend that the pundits curb their bravado and consider closely how those Americans who are not waiting for caucus or primary, are casting their first votes with their checkbooks.