Democrats & Liberals: Archives

Good catch. That’s a great article. It’s true that if you have a good agenda and an innovative way to present it, then the money will find you eventually.

However, keep in mind that in August 1999, Bush was the frontrunner on the basis of the money he had raised and had in fact been on the cover of Time magazine at about that time. (Interesting story about why I know this: I had made a trip to Ukraine in this month and had been carrying that issue of Time magazine with me and asking students and teachers if they knew who this person was on the cover. When they said no, I said, well, you better, because he’s going to be the next president. Full Disclosure: I hate George W!) I said this because of the enormous amount of cash George W. had been able to raise by that time.

Howard Dean may just be a blip, but he has the passion and energy —-to be a fund raiser—, when you get right down to it. We are coming to a point where fundraising ability becomes an indispensable job requirement. No wonder the electorate remains cynical.

There is a big difference in how Howard Dean is raising his money, vs. how Bush has raised it.

Bush gets 1,000 people to write $100,000 checks. Dean gets 1 million people to write $100 checks. They have have $100 million, but who has to obey those who gave him the money?

brilliant analysis. Big money politicians on both sides use corporate bigwigs and grass roots alike to run thier campaigns. So what?