Ground Up

A story from the New York Times explains Obama's fundraising campaign philosophy as a grass-roots, bottoms up campaign. I agree, and think it it very note-worthy that only individual contributions have been accepted, keeping PACs from buying his vote. Below is a synopsis of the story.

Two and a half years after he had taken quite a “spanking,” as he put it, in his bid to unseat an incumbent congressman, he was still struggling to pay off a $20,000 debt, eking out donations of $1,000 here, $2,000 there. His fund-raising prowess has helped make him the chief rival to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Interviews and campaign finance reports show Obama drew crucial early support from Chicago’s thriving black professional class, using it as a springboard to other rainmakers within the broader party establishment. Soon he was drawing money — and, just as valuable, buzz — among wealthy Chicago families, as well as friends from Harvard Law School and the University of Chicago.

Obama appears to have such a firm hold on so many of Chicago’s big donors that Clinton, who grew up in a Chicago suburb, did not even have a fund-raiser here during the crucial first quarter of this year. Obama’s campaign says its grass-roots support is expanding rapidly, in part through $25-a-ticket fund-raisers designed for a new generation of donors.

I have been asked what it is that people see in Obama, and I think this is a good summary from the New York Times:

Even as he cultivated an image as an unconventional candidate devoted to the people, not the establishment, he systematically built a sophisticated, and in many ways quite conventional, money machine.

Oval Office For Sale

It seems the Oval Office of the White House is up for sale! After reading the startling campaign fundraising numbers, clearly the Oval Office is available for purchase. By the end of the election, it seems these candidates could single-handedly end the national debt!

I must admit that I am happy to see that Obama stole a bit of Clinton's thunder by tying her for money raised, making him a bigger threat than I think Clinton's camp originally estimated and bringing more attention from the American people. He is on par with once-supposed front-runner Clinton. What I respect about Obama's fundraising strategy is that none of the money was from PACs or corporations, but instead all from individuals. To me this shows his vote on hot issues can't be bought by the PAC willing to pay the most. And no one other candidate can say they didn't accept PAC money! And more than half the donors contributed online, demonstrating that online support is growing and quashing some of my earlier fears that online support wouldn't translate to offline support.

While Clinton has honed a vast national fundraising network through two Senate campaigns and her husband's eight years as president, Obama launched his bid for the White House with a relatively small donor base concentrated largely in Illinois, his home state. But his early opposition to the Iraq war and voter excitement over his quest to be the first black president quickly fueled a powerful fundraising machine.

I received this e-mail from Obama's campaign: "I'm proud to tell you that, after the first quarter of the campaign, we've exceeded all of our hopes and expectations. In less than three months, a staggering 100,000 Americans have contributed to our cause -- tens of thousands more than the number reported by any other campaign. That's on top of the hundreds of thousands who have attended rallies, started groups and shared their ideas and energy."

What was a surprise is that former MA Gov. Mitt Romney also raised about the same amount, coming seemingly out of nowhere to raise the most of Republicans. It is reported that a large amount of his donations are from Mormon groups. Help us.