Hillary's fundraising claims
by highgrade, Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 05:40:12 AM EDT
The Clinton campaign has gotten a good run of press lately for their claim of raising $10,000,000 since the end of the PA primary. To be honest, considering the campaign's previous obfuscation regarding their fundraising - I think something smells a bit fishy.
On Politico, Ben Smith mentioned someone else with raised eyebrows:
As I suspected, the "Hillary raised $10 million online overnight" report that the Washington Post ran with earlier today was too good to be true. I don't know if the mistake is the reporter's or if someone at Camp Hillary was spinning a bit too fast, but there's no way they raised that much since her win in Pennsylvania yesterday.
An email from Terry McAuliffe, Clinton campaign chairman, that I received three hours ago, says "More than 50,000 people have contributed to the campaign for the very first time in the last 24 hours alone." If 80% of Clinton's donations are from new givers, that implies a total number of about 60,000 donations. If we're very generous and assume an average donation of $100, which is high for first-time donors, that gives Clinton a current take of at most $6 million.
Reading the Post's report from its Trail blog, which was by Matthew Mosk, it looks like the over-spin came from Hassan Nemazee, a finance co-chair for Clinton and longtime Democratic fatcat. A Google search shows Nemazee fed the same line to Business Week, which cited him for the news that Clinton supposedly took in $10 million by 2pm this afternoon.
I'm willing to bet that in the next few days the record will be corrected and we'll find out that in fact the campaign did not actually raise $10,000,000 - but as the writer above notes, it's all about perception. If the Clinton campaign can make the press and people believe that there is this huge groundswell of new support, then the spin was worth it.