Fundraising

What's the deal with the Dem candidates' fundraising. You'd think in a competitive race like this they'd be able to match Portman. Not even close.

Portman $8.5 million
Fisher $3.9 million
Brunner $850K

---

by: panhandler @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 15:55:36 PM UTC

Fisher's numbers aren't bad

3.9 million isn't impressive, but it's not bad either.  Portman has been a fundraising machine.  Compared to Portman, yes, the numbers look bad, but I'd say it's more to Portman's ability to raise cash than it is for Fisher not raking in the money.

Brunner's numbers are bad. Period.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 16:28:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree

Portman is better than the average Republican at fundraising.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 19:08:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can't say I'm that impressed with Fisher either.

As for Brunner the only rational explanation is she isn't even trying.  Unless you're simply not making fundraising a priority there is no excuse for a statewide elected official to be that low.

NY-13, Democrat. Blog @ http://infinitefunction.wordpr...

---

by: Taget @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 20:15:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm hoping Fisher's internals show a blowout so he can stop spending...

...all his money on the primary.

His fundraising is mediocre for a big state U.S. Senate race, even though not pitiful, either.  He needs as big a haul as he can pull in for the general, and still probably will need a LOT of DSCC independent expenditures to keep it a tossup going into November.

And making me even more nervous about Fisher is the fact we can't say Brunner's candidacy is cutting into his fundraising!

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:29:24 PM UTC

What we could say

Is that the candidates are so similar that people won't commit money to a candidate who won't make it to the general.  Which, in my eyes, is likely the situation, and probably hurts us in the general because Portman is raking in the cash right now.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

---

by: daman09 @ Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 18:37:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fisher is in fact mediocre

But that doesn't mean he can't win.  Think of Richard Burr, who was mediocre and was up against a very popular Democrat, Erskine Bowles, but still won because people just didn't want a Dem representing NC in 2004.  If Strickland wins in OH-Gov, I can see a similar result for Fisher.

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...

---

by: Nonpartisan @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 01:52:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bowles lost twice

in '02 to Dole and in '04 to Burr.

While there are certainly reasonable doubts about Marshall as a candidate, I think it's a stretch to call Bowles "a very popular Democrat".

---

by: tietack @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 02:08:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't qualify Bowles as "very popular"

Bowles was in fact not popular outside the Durham-Raleigh-Chapel Hill region.  His father, Skipper Bowles, lost the 1972 Governor's race (first time we had a GOP Governor in 70+ years).  Erskine was tied to the Clinton administration, and Clinton was never popular in NC.  I found Erskine to be way too wonkish to ever succeed in NC.  He was also a bit aloof within the campaign crowds.  Truth be told, Erskine was only marginally a better candidate than Burr, but Burr had the Republican brand that was quite popular in NC back in 2004.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:33:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Time for Brunner to pull out

She is not gonna win this thing, but what she could do would be to weaken Fisher for the general in November.

---

by: bonncaruso @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 11:11:43 AM UTC