In March, McCain maintained menacing money problems

At first blush, John McCain’s $15 million fundraising haul in March may sound like good news for his campaign. After all, it was his best month to date.

The figure was confirmed by a McCain campaign official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the figure has not yet been officially released. The amount represents his best month yet, up from $11 million he raised in February and the $11.7 million he brought in for January.

But the fact Senator Barack Obama brought in $40 million and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton raised about $20 million in March highlights anew the fund-raising disparity between the Democrats and Republicans that has been a recurring theme over the past year.

The McCain campaign is expecting, however, to begin seeing the real fruit of its efforts to build up its fund-raising apparatus this month, now that its joint fund-raising arm with the Republican National Committee is up and running, enabling donors to write a single large check that will then be apportioned between the McCain campaign and the party.

We’ll see if matters improve in the coming months, but the New York Times characterized the $15 million figure as evidence of McCain’s fundraising “picking up.” That’s a positive spin on what appears to be discouraging news for the Republican candidate.

Jonathan Singer offers some much-needed context:

In March, the Obama campaign raised some $40 million, putting their overall total for the quarter in the range of $130 million. The Clinton campaign, which no longer has a particularly easy path to the nomination, raised $20 million in March, raising her total for the year to roughly $70 million. McCain, on the other hand, could only manage to bring in $15 million for the month — including just $4 million from the grassroots — moving his overall haul for 2008 to under $40 million.

In other words, McCain couldn’t raise in three months what Obama was able to raise just this past month alone (a fundraising month that actually represented a decline of more than a quarter from the previous month). Pitting McCain against Clinton, the Republican in three months took in just 70 percent of what the Democrat was able to bring in during just two months.

I’d just add that the sources of McCain’s underwhelming total are just as important.

Marc Ambinder noted, “$11m came from a spurt in the campaign’s high-dollar fundraising. $4m was raised through direct mail and Internet efforts.”

That has to be discouraging for the McCain campaign, since it means the bulk of the money — $11 million out of $15 million — came from donors the senator won’t be able to hit up for more donations later. This is in stark contrast to the Democratic candidates, who not only are raising a lot more over the same time period, but who benefit from lots of small-donor contributors who can keep donating before reaching the legal limit.

Patrick Ruffini told his fellow Republicans what they probably don’t want to hear.

As much as I don’t want to sound unhelpful, it’s time for a little tough love. If anyone thinks McCain raising $15 million in March is good news — and crucially, just $4M of it from online and direct mail — then they’re probably part of the problem rather than part of the solution. […]

[T]hey not only expect to lose the fundraising race, but intend to go down without a fight. How? By relying on the same weakened high-dollar model that fell short for every Republican candidate in the primary, and barely bothering with the untapped potential of the Internet that John McCain first discovered in 2000, and has enabled every candidate who has used it well to exceed expectations.

Maybe this news will rally GOP donors to McCain’s cause, or perhaps this will lead Republican contributors to feel dejected and focus on down-ballot races.

Either way, McCain’s fundraising has to be encouraging to Dems.

I got news for the Washington bobbleheads: You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Count all the potential voters for Obama, and figure an average donation of even five bucks, and you have a tidal wave of cash, none of it with strings attached. And if he needs more, we’l be there. All he needs to do is keep the faith and put out the call for more.

One thing I hope Dean is smart enough to do is target the stonger Republicans who have access to the RNC cash. When they feel the heat, they will suck up all the available cash. Like good Republicans they will look out for themselves first and leave those unable to get the huge wads of cash to be buried in the Democratic tidal wave.

  • According to CNN Headline News just now, Obama bowled a 37 out of 300* and Clinton couldn’t bowl either on the Ellen show. Don’t you know that is the only thing that really matters to voters? I haven’t heard anything on CNN about this fund raising you speak of.

    *Yes I know he only bowled 7 frames so it wouldn’t actually be out of 300, but apparently CNN doesn’t.

  • Shalimar (2) But more importantly, can McCain bowl? Or does he merely get reported as “a straight shooter.”

  • Given the bandwagon effect, that is really pretty damning that a winning McCain trails far behind a candidacy-on-life-support Clinton. Assuming Obama wins the nomination, Clinton supporters who have not given more than $25000 to all political recipients in the aggregate this cycle can still give him $2300 even if they maxed out to her, right?

    And is that unified fundraising with the RNC legal? (Not that we have a functioning FEC to make that determination or do anything about it. . . )

  • This post was brought to you by the letter ‘M.’

    The key, of course, is McCain gets to spend all $15 million attacking Obama, while Obama has to spend his haul dodging the ankle biter.

    Oh, how I wish we could focus on McCain and get Obama campaigning across the country for other candidates and help them raise money.

  • Considering that some mailed crap to the NRCC last month, I’d have to say it was a good haul for John. Otherwise unimpressive vs what Obama or even Clinton brought in.

    I’m wondering if he’s regretting the Feingold/McCain Bill.

    For those wondering about money flowing to 527s, I’m guessing that the housing bubble is affecting Repub supporters greatly as much of their support came from that sector. First of all Bob Perry, the ratfucker behind the Swift Boat attacks is/was a real estate “tycoon.” Sure he’s rich, but I’m suspecting that he’s more worried about keeping his own ass afloat than making more slimy commercials. Also, think of all the money lost in hedge funds (like the Carlyle Group real estate hedge that lost BILLIONS) which us “regular” folks don’t and won’t have access to as investment vehicles. How many of those folks throw money at the Repubs? Probably a hell of a lot more than do at Dems.

    As rich as the Oil goons are, they’re also cheap greedy bastards and won’t give any more than they have to.

    My simpleton’s take is that the Real Estate Bubble/Hedge Fund Mashup has taken a huge bit out of Repub Fundraising and put the Repubs at a serious disadvantage.

  • McCain has some mendacity problems too.

    He just conflated al Qaeda and the shiites (again) during his questioning of Petraeus.

  • I here ya doubtful. Imagine if that $60 million Democratic cash fund was directed solely at McCain who has only $15 million to retaliate with. That would be money well spent. By using that $60 million pool to attack other Dems, it’s like more campaign cash in McCain’s coffers. Give it up Hillary.

  • Racer X @ 7: I don’t guess we’ll hear about that little bit of deception on CNN.

  • On the other hand, 501)c)(4)s, this year’s 527s, are expected to raise enormous amounts of money this election season. Those McCain donors who have maxed out on campaign donations can secretly donate unlimited amounts to 501(c)(4)s. TPM Muckraker posted about them yesterday.

    Here is an example of how a Republican front operates as a 501(c)(4);

    On October 30, 2006, Paul Kiel at TPM MR asked readers for help identifying who was behind the Progressive Policy Council which had sent out mailers to Pennsylvanian voters. The mailer compared the similarities between Rick Santorum’s social views to Bob Casey’s.

    Kiel could only identify Jason Torchinsky as the person who registered the Progressive Policy Council in Virginia in June 2006. Torchinsky is an attorney with Holtzman Vogel. Alex and his wife, Jill Holtzman are among the dirtiest of dirty Republican operatives.

    Yesterday, I reviewed the Progressive Policy Council’s 2006 990 and surprise, surpise – the board of directors was made up of two DC Republican consultants and one Pennsylvania-based Republican operative:

    Corrin Merritt
    Craign Snyder
    Mike Devanney

    Merritt and Snyder are partners in Ikon Public Affairs.

    Revenue in 2006 was $255k.

    The Council was dissolved in June 2006.

    We have no idea who came up with the $255k. The money obviously funded the campaign mailers and the Council was obviously set up solely to influence an election.

    That’s the way it will work this year.

    I am researching another couple of Holtzman Vogel 501(c)(4) specials, the American Future and the Iowa Future Fund and posted about them at the TPM Cafe.

  • What I don’t understand, looking at the fundraising numbers – and this is only in the context of the Dem race – how Clinton and her supporters can suggest that Obama is ONLY the candidate of the “elite”, “well-educated”, “well-financed”, when SO much of his money raised was from – seemingly, anyway – in small amounts, from many, many donors.

    Obviously, his appeal must be to a fairly broad range of people. Maybe I’m wrong about this, am I?

  • You/re not wrong. Hillary’s supporters, in a way very similar to Republicans, seem unable to actually reason logically, so they swallow any shit her campaign gives them. That her pitch doesn’t actually makes sense is no obstacle.

  • Shalimar, well, the press also appears to be hoeing the same line. It’s very frustrating.

  • You know I think that Clinton and Obama have probably ALREADY EACH raised more money for the General Election that John McCan’t has.

    Try finding the money on hand numbers for the General from their campaign reports and compare them to McCan’ts $15 Mil.

  • It’s stuff like this that keeps me thinking that we have a very good shot at taking back the White House, even as it looks like it’ll be a very close election. If we can project some hope into the numbers, it means that we have a level of support that isn’t being captured by the polls. If we can’t, then it means we have enough that we’ll have the money to brings others around to our point of view.

    I guess it’s better in that sense that more is always good, but he’s been the nominee for at least six weeks now. Even if his fund raising apparatus isn’t as prominent on the Internet as Obama’s or even Clinton’s, he’s got to shape up if he’s even going to have a chane at competing. I don’t know about how we as outsiders could judge this, but the campaign insiders know if his online operation is improving or languishing. If I were McCain, I’d be looking for any signs that things were headed in the right direction, because if they aren’t, I don’t know how he’s going to compete.

  • Comments are closed.