ah a quick tour of google news explains why.... http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2008/10/28/small_donors_not_spending_limits_fueling_obamas_last_lap/
Small donors, not spending limits, fueling Obama's last lap By Peter S. Canellos Globe Staff / October 28, 2008 Email| Print| Single Page| Yahoo! Buzz| ShareThisText size + WASHINGTON - It is now almost impossible to flip through the radio dial without hearing a woman's voice talking about putting off important medical tests because she had to cut back on health insurance, after which an announcer zings John McCain for his plan to tax health benefits (without mentioning, of course, the $5,000 tax credit that is the centerpiece of McCain's plan). Discuss COMMENTS (11) MORE POLITICAL COVERAGE McCain calls liberals a threat to economy Obama reprises call for change and unity Canellos: Small donors fueling Obama's last lap For pollsters, finding an accurate sample is art, science Notebook: McCain attacks Obama on redistribution McCain is banking on Biden gaffe ATF breaks up plot to assassinate Obama The final stretch: Rivals talk taxes, new politics Mass. Democrats campaigning in swing states Kerry, Beatty trade jabs on partisanship at final debate POLITICAL OPINION Derrick Z. Jackson: Time for a chat with automakers H.D.S. Greenway: Character trumping experience More Campaign '08 Coverage It's just one of many Barack Obama ads dominating the airwaves in Washington, Boston, and elsewhere. By contrast, McCain's own misleading radio ad - declaring that Obama will "raise your taxes," without mentioning that the statement applies only to the top 5 percent of earners - is running far less frequently. The fact that the campaigns are running misleading ads is not surprising. The fact that Obama is wildly outspending McCain going down the stretch is much more likely to be remembered once the campaign is over. And the questions will be: Did Obama's lavish campaign end, once and for all, the idea of federal spending limits? And did the spending limits help to take down their prime author, McCain? It seems likely that most of Washington will see it that way. Some Republicans are privately grumbling that McCain helped create a system of campaign finance rules that hurt the GOP, and that he's now getting his just deserts by having to watch Obama saturate the airwaves in the final weeks of their bitterly fought presidential campaign. The reality is somewhat less Shakespearean, however. First off, Obama's money advantage is not simply the product of federal spending limits, which McCain accepted - in order to receive taxpayer matching funds - while Obama, reversing an earlier pledge, did not. Even if presidential candidates accept the limits, their party committees are free to continue fund-raising and spending on their behalf. So McCain has been able to continue raising and spending money through the Republican Party. Unfortunately for the GOP and its nominee, Obama has been outraising them substantially. Tapping his vast network of online donors, Obama collected $37 million in the first two weeks of October, while the Republican National Committee, through its various offices, brought in only $15 million. Even if Obama had accepted the spending limits - which would have obliged him to cede any additional fund-raising to the Democratic National Committee - it is all but certain that the Democrats would be spending more than the Republicans on the presidential race. The reason seems to be that Democratic donors are much more energized about this year's presidential race, and now have a reliable vehicle in the Internet to donate money quickly. Indeed, about half of Obama's nearly half-billion-dollar fund-raising haul has come from having millions of small donors give less than $200, the cut-off for reporting the names of the donors. (The Republicans have asked the Federal Election Commission to make sure these small donors are legitimate, and that larger donors aren't simply finding creative ways to divide up their contributions.) Unless the FEC exposes some fraud, however, the notion of small donors providing the advantage in a presidential campaign is far more palatable to the public than having fat cats or special interests footing the bill. Back in 2004, President Bush gained an edge on his Democratic opponent, John F. Kerry, in part by "bundling" contributions: Under this system, powerful fund-raisers collected hundreds of thousands of dollars each for Bush by having dozens of their friends give the maximum amount allowable under the law. While both sides have done some bundling this time around, the fact that Obama's greatest advantage comes from small donors will probably quell any further demands for reform; such little guys aren't assumed to be seeking political favors. But there's no doubting the power of money in politics, and Obama is proving this nostrum yet again. In traditional battleground states like Ohio and Florida, where both campaigns are spending heavily and local parties are fully ginned up and organized, Obama and McCain remain neck-and-neck in the polls. In other states such as Colorado and Virginia, which Kerry essentially conceded to Bush by pulling out his scant resources, Obama has turned on the spending spigot and built up a big lead in the polls. That's why Washington, which abuts Virginia, and Boston, which is close to battleground New Hampshire, are hearing so much from Obama these days. And it appears to be working. Peter S. Canellos is the Globe's Washington bureau chief. National Perspective is his weekly analysis of events in the capital and beyond. On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > not sure why they would bother. The whole fun of being a large > campaign donor has traditionally been in being a large campaign donor. > I think the Republicans are just trying to imply that there is > something wrong with small donors. > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I will concede that it is possible green fairies are feeding both sides, but >> it is highly unlikely. >> >> However, I would argue that it is likely that people are using pre-paid >> cards to skirt the system. >> >> If there is a loophole, you can bet both sides are exploiting it. >> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> it is possible that little green fairies are feeding both candidates >>> money also, but I find it unlikely. >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Scott Stroz >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:277389 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
