The latest fundraising figures are available for all presidential candidates for the first quarter of 2007. It was no surprise that Senator Hillary Clinton raised the most cash. It was nothing short of astonishing that Mitt Romney was a very close second to her. The AP is running a story that has been picked up all over the world. CNN’s version is typical. Updated 9:03 a.m Hugh Hewitt has an interesting post on the New York Times’ take on the Romney fundraising success. Briefly glancing over the Times’ article, I think Hewitt has a point. The Times is playing the Mormon Church card in Romney’s fundraising success, which is simply inaccurate.
According to CNN’s article, Mitt Romney raised $23 million, almost double the amount of Senator John McCain, once considered the man to beat in the Republican primaries. Check out the popup link in the article to see graphic of all candidates and their fundraising:
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) — Republican Mitt Romney reported Monday he had raised $23 million for his presidential campaign during the first three months of the year, shaking up the GOP field. Sen. John McCain of Arizona lagged with $12.5 million raised.
McCain, at one point considered the Republican to beat, acknowledged he had “hoped to do better” in the first quarter of the year, although his campaign manager, Terry Nelson, said in a statement: “Fundraising in the first quarter is no more important than fundraising throughout the entire primary election campaign.”
The figures released can include contributions, transfers from other campaign accounts and loans.
Meanwhile, the current leader in Republican presidential surveys, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, said his donations totaled $15 million — including more than $10 million raised during March alone.
This puts Mitt Romney in the top tier of Republican presidential candidates, even though he does not have the greater name recognition as McCain or Giuliani. In another AP article carried by the Guardian, Romney concluded that his successful fundraising efforts directly resulted from people connecting with his positive message:
BOSTON (AP) – Mitt Romney on Tuesday credited his lead in Republican presidential fundraising to “a message that’s connecting” and said he isn’t worried about his relatively low standing in the polls.
The former Massachusetts governor, who posted a staggering $23 million in first-quarter fundraising, said “the polls at this stage are name ID. … Of course, I’m not a household name.” He said he’s concentrating his early efforts on organizing and fundraising in the early delegate-selection states.
Interviewed Tuesday on the morning news shows, Romney, who has cast himself as an outsider in his bid for the GOP nod in 2008, said “it’s a message that America’s strength is derived by people, not the government, and we need somebody who’s not a politician to make sure the government understands that.”
Romney, who has an appearance scheduled in New Hampshire later Tuesday, has urged people to watch his campaign surge as early polls have shown him trailing former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain.
On Monday, it burst into full glory after just three months.
Romney, still relatively unknown across the country, bested not only McCain and Giuliani in first-quarter fundraising, but registered a performance that rivaled the $26 million previously announced by Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton.
“I’m heartened by the fact that I’ve received extraordinary contributions from all over the country,” he said on NBC’s “Today” show.
Romney’s successful fundraising will also elevate his press coverage, and by extension further light upon the Church. This can be a good thing, particularly if positive and balanced coverage helps to dispel the myths that some people hold about the Church and its doctrines and beliefs.
While I’m pleased to see Romney have success, I’m still very troubled about his war positions. For the life of me I can’t figure out why he wants to tie his hopes to the failed Bush administration policies in Iraq, particularly when an overwhelming majority of Americans are opposed to the Iraq war. I also think it negatively reflects on the Church, indirectly of course.
The other downside about the fundraising story is the sad fact that it takes so much money to run an effective presidential campaign. Having to raise so much cash has to compromise an candidate’s independence to some degree, even if that candidate is Mitt Romney. The 2008 campaign is roaring off in an incredible start. Time to buckle up!
Note: PDOE has an interesting post over at Mormon Mentality on a different aspect of Romney’s successful fundraising.
See also Sherpa’s pretty cool post on this over at Discussions of a Different Sort.
Messenger and Advocate 
April 3, 2007 at 7:43 am
NPR did an awesome segment on this the past two days….but rather than post it here, I’ll post them both on my political blog. Seriously awesome. If you have audio, listen to it. If you don’t start dancing in your seat…then you’re dead inside.
April 3, 2007 at 7:50 am
Guy,
I don’t see the church caring too much about its image. If it would, then it wouldn’t be so close to the Bush administration (meeting with Bush, what three times now for Gordon B. Hinckley? and accepting Cheney’s visit to BYU later this month). I really do wonder why our Apostles don’t speak more about the most important issue facing America today: Iraq. Their silence equals acceptance.
April 3, 2007 at 8:21 am
Sherpa,
Thanks for those links. They were awesome!
Dan, We all know that the Church is very image conscious, which is reflected in their choice of PR firms. Nothing wrong with that either.
April 3, 2007 at 8:32 am
No problem. Thanks for the link!
Yeah, I agree with you about the fact the Church is very image conscious. I don’t see a problem with it either.
April 3, 2007 at 10:12 am
Guy,
Then why is the church so chummy with the Bush administration?
April 3, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Daniel,
Maybe, just maybe, because the Bush administration’s point of view, however imperfect, might, just might, be closest to what is best…
April 3, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Dan: I’m not sure the Church is any more chummmy with the Bush administration than they have been administrations under prior presidents. The fact that the Bush administration has a horrible war policy is not really the Church’s fault. I wish they would speak out against the war; but seldom has the Church done that.
Ron: I’m not sure you can link the Bush administration’s policies to anything close to what is best–which in my view would be a celestial form of government exemplified by Enoch’s group and the Nephites for a time after Christ’s post resurrection visit. There’s just no room for comparison.
April 4, 2007 at 8:00 pm
If the Constitution is hanging by a thread, Harry Reid is currently hacking at that thread with a machete.
As an arch-Liberal activist, Mr. Reid has worked across the board to undermine everything our inspired Founding Fathers sacrificed to hand down to us. Reid has come out against freedom of religion and for freedom from religion. He opposes the right to bear arms. He has been working to undermine the Commander in Chief in time of war. He has done everything possible to block the President’s Constitutional authority to appoint solid constructionist judges to the federal bench and to the Supreme Court. In fact, Reid has been doing all in his power to undermine both the Executive and Judicial branches of our Constitutional government in the name of solidifying power in the hands of his political party.
My only hope is that the Lord will call a good and noble man like Mitt Romney to raise again the Title of Liberty like Captain Moroni of old. Perhaps Romney and other patriotic Elders of the Church can indeed help save the Constitution of this choice nation.
Admin. note to Steve M. I have extensively edited your comment. It was filled with personal attacks and what I considered to be unsuitable tone for civil discussion. I don’t mind you expressing a different view point from mine, or anyone else’s; however, if you want to do it on this blog, I insist you do so with civility and respect. In the future, if you insist on making the type of comment you originally made, I will simply delete it, rather than take the time to put it into moderation and edit it.
April 8, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Dear Brother Steve M. Anonymous:
Just for a starter, I suppose torturing prisoners is one of the good things that America has stood for since its Divinely inspired founding.
I also suppose invading another nation without just cause and killing about 100,000 innocent men, women, and children is another virtue that we should be proud of as a nation.
I suppose that good and noble brother Mitt was ‘justified’ in supporting gay rights when he ran for Governor of Massachusetts, but there’s no allowance given to Senator Reid?
I suppose that to Brother Steve M. (anonymous), judging my his hateful diatribe against Senator Reid, that fairness is not part of ‘everything good that America has stood for.’
Perhaps if Brother Steve M. wasn’t anonymous he would be a little more civil in his discourse, especially in view of the recent lecture from the brethern at General Conference.
But then again, Brother Anonymous can always say, “Hey, the brethern sponsor Sean Hannity three hours a day, six days a week, that’s all he asks,” and so why not mimic Hannity. After all, he’s a Great American, (just ask him) and the brethern approve.
Joe Watts
P.S. Guy: Perhaps you would prefer that I quit reading this blog. I think I’ve got a lot different take on things and perhaps my contrary views are not welcome.
My intent is only to suggest that people ‘think’, but maybe that’s not the purpose here. If you feel my comments are taking away from your intent I will politely quit visiting the site.
Just let me know!
April 8, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Joe, You are free to read this or any other blog. I appreciate you brining to my attention Steve M’s comment above. I have placed it in moderation. I am pretty tolerant of many and varied viewpoints; but, I do insist on civility while making your points. I do not believe Steve M. did that. I do believe you did that.
I will be severely editing Steve M’s comment. If he wants to try again to make his points in a civil manner, great. If not, he can go somewhere else and spew his hatred.
Thanks for your comment, and more importantly the way you made it.