Another twist
The NYT reports that, just as the real primary season is about to begin, most of the candidates have pretty much run out of money, as well as time for additional fundraising:
Together, the top six candidates across both parties are projected to have brought in a total of more than $400 million and burned through at least 80 percent of it. Now, the top three Democrats and the five or so Republicans all find their bank accounts depleted just as the most expensive phase of the race is about to begin. The candidates are entering a far-flung battle, with more than 20 other states voting in the three weeks that follow regional skirmishes on Saturday in South Carolina and Nevada…
Advisers to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Senator Barack Obama of Illinois have said their primary campaigns had each raised about $100 million by the end of last year. But both were spending more than $7 million a month in the third quarter, and spent an additional roughly $15 million apiece on television advertising in the early contests…Mrs. Clinton’s advisers have said she came out of the New Hampshire primary with about $20 million left, and Mr. Obama appears to be in a similar position…
Most of the Republicans, who badly trailed the Democrats in fund-raising last year, are even harder-pressed. Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor and the biggest fund-raiser among the Republican candidates, brought in more than $60 million last year. But he was burning through more than $4 million a month in the third quarter, had spent about $4.5 million on advertising by the middle of January, and acknowledged last week that he had only $7 million left…Mitt Romney, a financier with a personal fortune of more than $250 million, is the only Republican whose campaign is not feeling the pinch: he has pumped more than $17 million of his own money into his campaign…
As for where to spend their scarce cash, each party presents a different puzzle. Democrats award convention delegates according to the proportion of votes each candidate receives in each state, so campaigns will most likely flock to the coasts and big cities where they can find the most voters. The Republican contest is more of a gamble. Many states — including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Missouri and Virginia — are winner-take-all, posing big risks for big rewards.
On the basis of resources, it would appear that the Clinton campaign might be better positioned than that of Obama, since President Clinton could work on fundraising full time. On the GOP side, one would have to think that Romney has the advantage. But the long war of the 2007-2008 campaign has had quite a few twists so far, so we’ll just have to see what develops.
January 20th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
It sounds like nearly all of them paced their spending under the assumption that there would be a quick decision due to the handful of early primaries and caucuses. Not a surprising choice, either; it’s happened many times in the past.