Obama On Track To Raise Record $$ This Month

Barack Obama is on track to raise more than 50M this month, if outside projections and outside advisers to the campaign are correct.

His campaign officially admits that they'll raise more than $36M. Beyond that, they're keeping mum. Only a few key aides know the true projected total and they're not talking to me or others in the press.

But outside advisers, and one Republican math whiz, are reading the body language as best they can.

Patrick Ruffini notes that Obama "had tallied about 256,000 donors for the year as of the end of January." These donors contributed an average of $140 each for a total of $36M.

Now, he notes, "Obama’s public donor count stands at 583,525, meaning about 327,000 people donated in February. With the same average, that would give Obama just over $46 million in 21 days."

And Ruffini has created an embedded crowdsourced spreadsheet that tracks every bit of public data about Obama's fundraising. From those calculations, he gets at least $60M for the quarter.

Outside campaign advisers said that they believed the campaign would raise at least $50M, based on conversations they've had with the cryptkeepers.

How much will Hillary Clinton raise? Between $25M and $30M, according to advisers.

Comments

Marc,

Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't most consider these figures nothing short of astonishing?

Posted by Brian | February 22, 2008 10:22 AM

Obama had more than 60,000 new donors in the 24hrs. following his victory in Wisconsin.

The really interesting question is: what to do with all that money? I would think it would be hard to spend more than 15million on a single giant state in two weeks. So even if he spends 30 mill on TX and OH, that still leaves another 30 for... for what?

Can the money be turned over for the general election?

Posted by lampwick | February 22, 2008 10:28 AM

And if Obama doesn't meet these expectations will the MSM consider it a "failure" on his part once they are bandied about (with really, no evidence to support them?) Or if he does meet them, will this chattering neutralize their impact? Give it a rest. You've carried a lot of water for the Clinton team this morning -- it's not even noon yet. Going to remove you from my bookmarks -- no good objective analysis here, and no fearless partisanship either. Just sneaky.

Posted by Christine | February 22, 2008 10:30 AM

Good point, lampwick.

If these projections are right, Obama, in his March 4 victory speech, should offer $10 million to the DNC to finance do-overs in Florida and Michigan.

Posted by daft | February 22, 2008 10:39 AM

Any chance on distinguishing the primary v. general fundraising? Or is all of that $50MM for the general? I'm curious to see if McCain gets a head-start on general fundraising, and if it will even matter.

lampwick, the money can't be turned over for the general, I don't think. But someone else can correct me if I'm wrong.

Posted by dt | February 22, 2008 10:41 AM

I think I see a couple analytical flaws and plain ol' typos in this.

For one, this Ruffini fellow is projecting $60 million for the quarter -- that can't possibly be right, can it? I mean, he's already only $24 million from that before Super Tuesday. So that's clearly seems to be a mistake, or ignorant if not.

And, the extrapolation appears to take into account the total donations made by each donor over a period of time (granted, only a month), but then assumes each future donor immediately contributes that amount. They might, or might not, but I would think that Obama's network of small donors would be more inclined to chip in $25 here and there. So this might well overstate the case.

Also, I believe that the Obama campaign's official projection for the month was $36 million, not a guarantee that they will exceed it.

Plus, what's the definition of an "outside campaign adviser"? Someone who works in politics, just not for that particular campaign? A consultant? What? This from the guy bitching about the NYT calling sources "associates."

Finally, I'm not sure I buy into Hillary's fundraising projections. She had a phenomenal beginning of the month, but public data indicates that her numbers may have dropped off rapidly. As of a few days ago, she was probably taking in $500k a day, and I'm pretty sure you don't get to count the money her 527 is raising ;)

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 22, 2008 10:48 AM

""Obama’s public donor count stands at 583,525, meaning about 327,000 people donated in February. With the same average, that would give Obama just over $46 million in 21 days."

As of this morning the count is at 958,634, meaning even this is an underestimate. As mentioned above he had 60,000 new donors in the 24 hours after Wisconsin and Hawai'i. 110,000 new donors in last 48 hours. Many of the early donors, including myself, have ramped up their contributions in the last week or so. February's numbers will blow all previous records out of the water.

His pledge to agree with McCain on public financing in the general means I might get another rebate some time in the summer :)

Posted by Obamacan | February 22, 2008 10:57 AM

Another simple way of guesstimating take:

By the end of January the campaign had about 700,000 unique donors since the inception of the campaign in early 2007.

That base brought in $36 million.

By the end of February the base will have expanded to about 1,000,000 unique donors.

Assuming the monthly take is proportional to the size of the base, that should mean a little more than $50 million.

Posted by lampwick | February 22, 2008 11:13 AM

If he can't use the money for the general, he should give it back to the contributors and then encourage them to donate for the general.

Posted by goethean | February 22, 2008 11:35 AM

Obama can't use this money for the general, but he surely can use the get-out-the-vote operations he's building in every state in the general.

Expect a lot of money to be spent on GOTV operations in Ohio and Texas. And in Pennsylvania and North Carolina too, even if Clinton drops out. Every state will get the foundation built this summer.

Basically, he can keep spending this money until the convention, but not directly against McCain. But there's plenty of wriggle room.

Posted by pls | February 22, 2008 11:45 AM

He should pay down the national debt in advance of his Presidency because it will increase enormously under his administration.

I hear surprising naivete in terms of the economy. And, I might add, with the Turks finally making a move in Iraq (who didn't know THAT would happen), there is little hope that his promised withdrawal from Iraq will happen. So, the billions of dollars that is supposed to be (and it's not our money to begin with) saved from the war, will not come available. He's a nice guy, but naive.

Posted by Leigh | February 22, 2008 11:47 AM

I don't think he can use the money for the general election-- but that doesn't start, technically, until after the convention. So he'll have a lot of time to use this money, when he can basically go after McCain as the presumptive nominee. I don't know if there are any restrictions on messaging or what have you.

This is one of the concerns people had about Edwards as the nominee: having opted into the public financing for the primaries, he would have had little money to spend between a victory in the primaries and the Democratic convention.

Posted by PJ | February 22, 2008 11:48 AM

Evidently people shouldn't have been concerned about Edwards -- he could have just pulled a McCain and opted right back out.

I tend to get a little irritated when public figures use public money as collateral for loans, and I have a feeling I'm not the only one. I wonder how deftly McCain will handle that crisis. Any spin, er, words of wisdom from your source, Marc?

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 22, 2008 11:52 AM

Truly astonishing. I wonder if McCain or the rest of the GOP is thinking about that line from the movie Jaws, when Chief Brody realized how big the shark actually was, "You're gonna need a bigger boat."

Posted by Texas Indep. | February 22, 2008 12:05 PM

For what it's worth, I was tracking Obama donations and had him on pace to raise about $40M in February with an average donation of $75 per donor. Adjusting that for $140/donor raises the projection to almost $75M in February -- it's unbelievable. My numbers are just estimates based on the numbers they report through their website, but it sounds pretty clear that he's going to break $50M in February ... and that's with only 29 days!

Posted by Brian in Alexandria, VA | February 22, 2008 12:28 PM

Even if he wraps this up on March 4, it is still primary money to spend all the way up until the convention (someone correct me if I'm wrong). So there would be tons of time and money needed for months of "general" campaigning during the official primary season.

This is why McCain's problem with the FEC is so important. He might only have a few million to spend for 4-5 months.

Posted by bdevil02 | February 22, 2008 12:31 PM

daft

That was a brilliant fucking idea. You should change your name.

Posted by Dirk | February 22, 2008 1:17 PM

what's that saying...MONEY TALKS!

Posted by Brett J | February 22, 2008 1:22 PM

Why should Obama's campaign pay for the hubris of the Florida and Michigan democratic committees? Obama had absolutely nothing to do with each state's decision to defy the DNC so they could hold their primaries early. Nor did he have anything to do with the DNC's decision months ago to not count their delegates at the convention.

If the citizens of Florida and Michigan want to be angry at someone, they can be angry at their state's Democrat officials for disenfranchising them. Let the two states fund fixing their own mistakes.

Posted by Ryan | February 22, 2008 1:44 PM

I believe any money left over from the primary can still be used for the general, just like Hillary was able to use her excess funds from her Senate campaign. Actually, I think former presidential candidates can use money raised for a primary in a subsequent run for another office.eg. Senate

Posted by tony | February 22, 2008 1:57 PM

Ryan,
You are absolutely right, so far as you go. I too have little sympathy for the mess the Florida and Michigan party leaders have created. HOWEVER, leaving Florida and Michigan Democratic voters pissed off could cost one or both states for Obama in November. That's why I think some middle ground has to be found. My sense is that Obama would also do pretty well in the do-overs, and that would be good for all of us.

Posted by daft | February 22, 2008 2:05 PM

What are "outside campaign advisers." Marc?

Posted by Word wise | February 22, 2008 3:16 PM

Obama's general election campaign won't start until he accepts the nomination. So anything he wants to do before that moment is a primary expense. Building organizations, paying staff, buying ads ... the full range of stuff.

Bush beat Gore in 2000 by running many ads during the "primary" season when Gore had no money because of spending limits.

Posted by dByrd | February 22, 2008 5:56 PM

I wrote about exactly this yesterday in my blog. I also did some number crunching, and came up with about $60M.

I think that the Obama camp was very wise after Super Tuesday to change their publically-facing metrics, from "total dollars raised" to "total contributors", because they know very well that each contributor is worth over $100, on average.

After Super Tuesday, there was extremely public, competitive fundraising going on between Hillary's camp and Obama's, and that, frankly, was of more benefit to Hillary, even though Obama could still outraise her.

Why? Because, it started to establish her campaign as something that her supporters owned.

When Obama shifted from a goal of "total dollars" to "total contributors", that was a number that her campaign simply could not compete on an even basis with. As a result, we have seen a general decrease in Clinton online fundraising since then, while she and Bill have been forced to do fundraisers in NYC and CA, instead of campaigning in Ohio and Texas.

They've been raising money by promising Indian and Asian-Americans more foriegn work visas and more Asian exports into the U.S., instead of addressing the needs of people in Texas and Ohio for more jobs in those states, and the kind of retraining they need to get those kind of jobs.

Frankly, that's something the Obama camp should be hitting them on in the run-up to the election.

Expect the Obama camp to let people know soon enough about the one millionth Obama contributor... and expect them to announce before people go to the polls in Texas and Ohio that they've raised well over $50M for February.

That's *GOT* to take the wind out of the Clinton campaign's sails. They just got outspent 5-1 in Wisconsin, and money, combined with a virtual army of grassroots supporters, clearly made a huge difference there.

Truth is, it's not going to get any better for the Clinton campaign from this point on.

Posted by Mark Kraft | February 22, 2008 7:02 PM

People are ready for Obama, and they are using the only way they can to show it right now, campaign contributions. Hopefully they'll follow that up with their votes and we can get out of the Republican made mess we're in!

http://www.cafepress.com/sugarbelleshop/4226338

Posted by fifilaroach | February 22, 2008 9:56 PM

The Obama camapign needs to think carefully about what they do with this money, if, in fact it cannot be used in the general election.

It might be worthwhile to use some of this money to register black voters and voters under 30 across the country, whose registration rates lag behind those of other demographic groups.

And the Virginia exit poll and the Virginia State Board of Elections offers a lot of data to suggest that this can be done and have an impact on elections. The Virginia State Board of Elections said that from Janaury 1, 2008 through the last day to register to vote for the February 12, 2008, 34,000 now voters were registered in the state. Approximately 70% of these voters were under the age of 30. The exit poll in Virginia stated that new voters represented 35% of the electorate in Virgina on primary day - pretty impressive.

Southern states have large populations of blacks and voters under 30 who are not registered. If resources could be focued on states like Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Mississippi, perhaps you could not only win these states in the fall but you might be able to re-align these states permanently. Easy? No! Possible- Yes we can.

And in addition to these southern states, Missouri, Indiana and Ohio could be fertile ground for a registration campaign.

The Obama movrment offers the Democratic party multiple opportunites for a political re-alignment - lets HOPE WE can all make this a reality.

Posted by Robert N Pasadena | February 22, 2008 11:39 PM

It's dejas vous all over again. I remember when the pundits opined that the Hillary campaign was dead in New Hampshire. They were wrong then and they are wrong now. And they know it. That is why there are so many urging Hillary to quit the race right now and not let the voters of Texas and Ohio have their say. Those urging quitting are so transparent that it is an insult to the intelligence of the voters. Texans are too shrewed to let the Hillary haters in the media make up their minds for them.

Go Hillary.

Posted by AFgail | February 23, 2008 2:11 AM

Of course he can use any unspent primary money for the general. But you can't use money donated for the general until you get the nomination (Which is why hillary will be returning a lot of money.) Imagine the accounting nightmare, waste of time/resources, and the sheer stupidity of having to return "primary" money only to re-ask for it for the general election.

If people can keep excess cash from a Senate race to use for their next race, they can spend unused primary money in the general. Remember, this is how Hillary saved her bacon the first time that Obama outraised her. She transferred $10 million left over from her Senate race into her Presidential race, cooking the books and making it seem like they were tied in fundraising when she was really $10 million behind. That obscured the truth that Hillary has trailed Obama from Day One.

Posted by Keith L | February 23, 2008 9:14 AM

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27075
you gotta be nuts to vote for Obama

Posted by mikay | February 24, 2008 7:34 PM