Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's rural fundraising strongest - Clinton second

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:09 PM
Original message
Obama's rural fundraising strongest - Clinton second





Who’s Winning Rural Hearts And Minds--And Dollars?

-snip

Granted, the kind of money rural areas are coughing up for the presidential campaigns is dwarfed by what’s coming out of the cities. In the last quarter news outlets reported around five percent of donations came from rural America. But Obama leads all candidates, including the Arizonan John McCain, the North Carolinian John Edwards, and New Mexico’s Bill Richardson. He outraised Hillary Clinton by $100K, but also had almost double the number of contributors as she.

-snip

Looking at the Democratic side, it’s surprising that John Edwards’s populist message isn’t resonating. It’s possible that the endless stories we’ve all been subjected to about his expensive haircut have done the trick: making him appear to be a hypocritical rich guy only pretending to care about the disenfranchised. Or possibly savvy early donors think that the only way to stave off a seemingly inevitable Clinton nomination is to shore up the candidate that the media tells us is the one who could stop her--Barak Obama.

There’s a profound sense among western Democrats that I’ve talked to that Hillary Clinton at the top of the ticket would cut downticket Democratic candidates off at the knees. Edwards somehow isn’t making much of a dent in the west, and while Bill Richardson should be a natural favorite, he has yet to put his best foot forward. In fact, he stumbles so often and in such public ways that you have to wonder if he has a best foot. Thus, by default, your candidate is Obama.

It’s also entirely possible that the Obama campaign is just doing a better job of reaching out to people across the country. I was in Boise last month, my visit coinciding with an Ada County organizing meeting for Obama with his western field director. A few of the big names in Idaho Dem politics were there, but more importantly so were an impressive number of would-be volunteer worker bees. And not 10 minutes after I read the fundraising story at Daily Yonder, I got an e-mail letting me know about an upcoming Obama for Idaho organizing rally in Idaho Falls.



http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/whos_winning_rural_hearts_and_minds_and_dollars/C37/L37/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's what the polls don't show. Gobama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's kick it so that the haters can see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. And who are the haters?
No one disputes he can raise money. I just dispute he can't take the money and turn it into votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. You DO dispute that he can't take the money and turn it into votes?
So do I! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Thats correct, so when he loses the primary because lack of votes
At least he will still have all that money in the bank.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. You clearly didn't understand what you said then...
You said you dispute that he can't take the money and turn it into votes, meaning you think he CAN take the money and turn it into votes. I agree with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Even more impressive when one considers
the conventional wisdom that Obama is a candidate who appeals primarily to urban voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Interesting too
the idea that one or other of the candidates can only campaign in certain places. This takes the lid off that one, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. Great article and good news for Obama!
K&R :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCarolinawoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
8. In 2006, Clark was the one that all the Western nominees wanted to be seen with.
I think that if Hillary ends up being the nominee, this would be one of the reasons he would be chosen as her VP. I'm not saying I like this scenario, but I can see this coming down the line.

2008 is suppose to be the year we win the West----don't know how that fits with a Hillary nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Uh, no one gets to 'choose' the VP.
And, what makes you think Obama would accept?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NCarolinawoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Hillary would get to choose if she were the nominee.
I was remarking on the part in the OP's article that cited the worry of Western Democrats that Hillary's candidacy would hurt Western Congressional candidates who would be running in 2008.

It was a small part in the OP's post. Nothing to do with Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. It's something I was thinking about last night, NCwoman
Not about VP. I don't think she needs him (in particular) for VP. But what she gets out of the endorsement aside from military cred is what you're talking about. He can campaign for her in any uncomfortable spots as he did in the 2006 Congressionals where candidates have concerns. Whether or not those concerns are valid, it gives them an option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
13. Interesting numbers; Edwards' poor performance sticks out the most to me
His supporters say he's the best candidate to reach out to rural voters, but these numbers (along with the polling numbers) seem to dispute that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
15. Great news for Obama!!
The reports of his demise are greatly exaggerated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC