Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4

Both the Clinton campaign and the Obama campaign raised big dollars during the fourth quarter of 2007, but it looks like Clinton brought in a bit more.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton edged Democratic rival Sen. Barack Obama in year-end presidential campaign fundraising, according to figures released Wednesday by their staffs. But both candidates expect to benefit in coming weeks from a financial boomlet spurred by their early victories.

Obama's campaign reported collecting $8 million in the first eight days of January, and an additional $1.5 million Wednesday from Internet donors, largely because of excitement over his win in the Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3. Clinton, meanwhile, has already started to capitalize financially on her unanticipated victory in the New Hampshire primary.

Terence R. McAuliffe, Clinton's campaign chairman, said Wednesday that about $1.1 million in donations have come in since Tuesday night. "That is without any appeal" seeking donations, McAuliffe said on a conference call with top Clinton donors, urging them to capitalize on the fresh burst of momentum by each seeking to raise $10,000. "Let me say this . . . this is an opportunity for us to blow the roof off the place."

Both leading Democrats have maintained a breakneck pace of fundraising, outstripping their Democratic and Republican rivals. Each reported having raised more than $100 million by the year's end. Clinton's team reported raising more than $24 million in primary funds during the last three months of 2007, while Obama's team reported raising $22 million in primary funds during the period.

Anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that Obama has raised more during 2008 than has Clinton -- at least as of yesterday -- but both campaigns seem to be on fairly strong financial footing at this juncture. As a comparison, it appears that while Edwards did have a good fundraising clip in the immediate aftermath of his second place finish in Iowa, pulling in $1.6 million, during the entire last three months of last year his campaign brought in only between $3 million and $5 million. The loan that the Edwards campaign took out against an expected $9 million in federal matching funds certainly has helped and will continue to help the campaign to survive for the time being, but if there continues to be such a large disparity between the fundraising of Clinton and Obama on one hand and Edwards on the other, it's doubtful that Edwards will be able to have the same type of staying power as the other two candidates.



Display:


Jonathan (none / 0)

I have to give you some crap for almost dismissing these numbers

Another candidate behind the leaders, former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.), reported taking in more than $1.6 million in online contributions after his second-place finish in Iowa. He has also taken out a loan against $9 million in federal matching money, according to a campaign official. He raised between $3 million and $5 million during the final quarter of 2007.

I would have to say that these are pretty good numbers for someone who is getting a lot less press and who some here and else where think should drop out and support Obama.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 10:13:35 PM EST

Nope. (none / 0)

"Pretty good numbers for" is not the same as "pretty good numbers".  When Edwards raised $14M in the first three months of 2007, those were pretty good numbers.


by Adam B on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 10:45:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope. (none / 0)

I agree. Right now he is OK with money. Not where I would want him, but he also gets almost no press.

The money game must end.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 11:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope. (none / 0)

The money game must end?  Because you say so?  Because you'll stomp your foot and have a temper tantrum if it doesn't?  Feh.

As long as campaigns hire staff, run ads, travel back and forth across the country, etc., there will be a money game.  The only question is where the money comes from and in what amounts.


by InigoMontoya on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:12:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No... (none / 0)

Why do you have to be an ass about it?

So you think big money in politics is OK? The money game must end so that we can maybe have the media report on the candidates and not who they think is the one to beat based on how much money they raise.

You know... public funded elections.

So... is that OK with you or should I stomp my feet?  whatever.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:35:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't Bury The Lead (2.00 / 2)

If these fourth quarter numbers are correct, the total PRIMARY ONLY 2007 total contributions is approximately as follows:

CLINTON

Through 9/30, Published        $60,966,539
Plus: Fourth Quarter Est.       $24,000,000

2007 Primary Funds Total      $84,966,539    

OBAMA

Through 9/30, Published        $74,686,337
Plus: Fourth Quarter Est.       $22,000,000

2007 Primary Funds Total      $96,686,337

Difference                             +14% OBAMA              


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:00:51 AM EST

Re: Don't Bury The Lead (none / 0)

Does this include the Clinton transfer?


by rcipw on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:25:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

Primary collections only.  Even if you include the $10 million, he still beats her.


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:35:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

In spite of all the bloviating on the subject at the time Edwards' choice to go with public financing seems to be a reasonable one, in retrospect.


by Shaun Appleby on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:52:14 AM EST

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

One huge benefit for him: he hasn't had to waste time (and money) doing fundraising events.


by blueflorida on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:09:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

He's still fund-raising, I understand, with matching funds, isn't that how it works?  But it has given his campaign a firewall against the fund-raising doubts at this juncture.


by Shaun Appleby on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:23:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

A protracted primary reduces the amount of time the Republicans have to attack our candidate between the nomination and the convention. You make a very good point. Yet another reason for Edwards supporters to keep fighting.


by souvarine on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 11:58:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

Would kinda like to see his Cash-on-Hand numbers, though.  If it's less than 8 digits(i.e., less than 10 million), I have a hard time seeing how he survives probable distant third place finishes in Nevada and South Carolina with any resources to compete in a 22 state national primary 10 days later.

At some point the reality check arrives in the mail, and you have to cash it out, to stretch the metaphor just a bit.  If Edwards comes in above 20 percent in either or both Nevada or SC, that would seem like grounds for encouragement, but if it looks like he's doing a slow fade, then at some point even diehard progressives for whom he's the "first, second and third choice" have to consider backing the only other viable non-establishment candidate(while the establishment may more comfortable with him than you might like, he is nonetheless not [b]their[/b] first choice) in order to "unite to win".  


by megaplayboy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:33:45 AM EST

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (2.00 / 0)

The only viable non-establishment candidate?  Would that be Kucinich, then?  Last I looked, Obama fans are crowing about endorsements from John Kerry, a quasi-endorsement from Nancy Pelosi, other establishment endorsements.   Who is next?  Harry Reid?   The media pundocracy and a good part of the Democratic establishment want to anoint Obama.  The PEOPLE of New Hampshire had other ideas.  We'll see if the people of other states fall into lockstep with the fawning media and part of the establishment.  

As for Edwards:  I agree that his fundraising problems suggest that he will have trouble competing on Feb. 5.  But he will last until Feb. 5 for sure.   I don't think too many of Edwards' current supporters see Obama truly as the non-establishment candidate, and the way Obama's team is pushing the meme that they are supposedly successful in closing the divide in exactly that area (Super-delegates ARE the establishment) they appear to be sabotaging that idea even further.  


by georgep on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 11:25:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton Outraises Obama in Q4 (none / 0)

"Don't Bury The Lead"

The lead is that Clinton out-fundraised Obama in the last quarter of 2007. What happened before October of 2007 is old news, and is not the "lead." See Journalism 101.

"Our Moment Is Now"

Your "moment" was on the evening of January 3rd. It has now passed.


by freemansfarm on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 11:24:22 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.