Sen. Obama beats Sen. Clinton

Senator Obama raised about $5 million more than Senator Hilary Clinton this quarter from 258,000 donors. This is a big deal because what this shows is that even if Obama doesn’t win the nomination (though I hope he does) he has all but assured his viability as VP candidate regardless of who wins the nomination. The man is a force to be reckoned with, period.

“At least $31 million of Obama’s total is for party primaries,” whereas Clinton has not reported her primary/general election breakout, which effectively means that Obama has more money for the primaries. Obama, if any of your staff are reading this, don’t get comfortable and know this is a marathon, not a race. I should note I threw up the fist when I read this article.

Stay up fam,

Brandon Q.


Tags: , ,

2 responses to “Sen. Obama beats Sen. Clinton”

  1. Anonymous says :

    I agree it is an impressive 2nd quarter show. Not only did Obama out raise Clinton in sheer dollars, he also got that money from more people giving small donations, which is the real litmus test for local energy around these elections.
    What’s interesting is that still Sen. Clinton is significantly ‘ahead in the polls’. I personally believe that is because a) polls are more often than not a waste of time and wrong when it comes to representing regular folks in this country because b) polls usually skew towards likely voters, eg middle-upper class, white, old people who feel like voting benefits them… and Obama is about to turn out the people that those pollsters don’t even know where to find. But that’s just my take, what do you think it is that would cause this disparity?
    I also agree that Obama’s staff is getting a little bit comfortable because they can turn out a grip of folks to a rally or volunteer day with an email. That won’t cut it to win… you still have to work for people’s votes and identify the groups who are not included and/or excluded in that group. It will be very exciting to see how this money is going to be spent. I’ll look to the superspade to keep me updated on it…

  2. Garlin II says :

    Anonymous, you raise some interesting points, especially about polls. I think what is more telling than national polls are results of local polls, which have more meaning.

    Due to the structure of our system, to be ahead in a national poll is in fact meaningless, especially at this stage. What is more important now and through the remainder of the primary season is who is winning in local polls where the early primaries are held. For better or worse, the people ahead in the Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida, etc. primaries will be the people that we are talking about running, not the people who are ahead in national polls.

    One Love. One II.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: