Dean a Resounding Winner in 'Money Primary'

[reprehensor]

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/010204J.shtml

"With more than $40 million now raised in his run for the White House, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean posted a resounding victory Wednesday in the yearlong dash for cash among Democratic presidential candidates, cementing his status as the contender to beat in the race.

For all the importance of the Jan. 19 Iowa caucuses and the Jan. 27 New Hampshire primary, some analysts say the results of the "money primary" in the year before a presidential election are an even better guide to who will become the nominee. Since 1980, no major-party candidate who led in donations received by Jan. 1 of an election year has failed to clinch the nomination.

Dean's fundraising is "really what put him on the map as a candidate and allowed him to achieve the status he achieved," said Anthony J. Corrado Jr., a campaign finance expert at Colby College. "It has created a situation where most of the other candidates are going to find it hard to compete financially with Dean."

Dean's rivals acknowledge his fundraising prowess but say that his money advantage will not translate into victories when the contests begin. "

[Walt Starr]

1. "His money advantage will not translate into victories"

Methinks his rivals dream.

[Padraig18]

2. What else could his rivals say, realistically.

They have an uphill battle in several regards...

[Scott Lee]

3. "Will not translate to victories"

Oh, juicy. OK then, Kerry-Gephardt-Lieberman-Edwards-Kucinich-MosleyBraun-Sharpton....I guess you can stop your fundraising. Clearly, money isn't everything.

[janx]

4. The only thing more impressive than his money situation now

is the number of his supporters.

That money is coming from one heck of a lot of people.

[calimary]

7. Especially when you remember that those contributors do NOT all

cough up 2 grand apiece. They're giving 25, 35 and 50 bucks. I think the average was something like 70 dollars. So if he's racked up the most money via small contributions, he's got a WHALE of a lot of people supporting him.

THAT is significant.

What's also significant is the notion that people like Clark and Kucinich are bound by federal matching fund limits now, which means their financial health is not going to be as sound. They won't be able to compete with Dean and others who've renounced matching funds. Dean has no limits in that department, while they all do.

[Cha]

5. Happy New Year! And out with the old and

in with the new! New way of campaigning! Money from People that translates into Votes!

[Democrats unite]

6. It takes more than just money...

To build a village.

[Walt Starr]

8. A half million volunteers can build a nation

Tens of thousands donating the cash have built a juggernaut.

[Cha]

9. Yeah! You got that right! It takes People and the

right kind of People, too. Like the ones who give money to the Dean campaign!:D

[Demobrat]

11. Not to mention work their butts off

for free.

[auburnblu]

10. His fundraising strategy has been awesome

Like Dean or not, his campaign has thrived in light of recent campaign financing reform. All it takes is less than 600,000 doaners giving $70 each and you exceed $40 million. Compare Dean's campaign to Gephardt's. Dick Gephardt may have been the money leader right now if unions were allowed to give more dollars directly to candidates. Union employees are so used to the unions donating portions of their dues for them I'm not sure unions members in large numbers are donating that much to Gephardt's campaign.

[MercutioATC]

12. Yeah, but $40M and 500,000+ citizens makes one hell of a "village"

...