Post Q1 Presidential Thoughts

Now that the fundraising numbers are out and have been digested, I think there is a striking difference between the Clinton and Obama campaigns. We still don't know whether or not Obama beat Clinton in dollars raised for the primary election (Clinton has not disclosed the breakdown of her contributions), but we do know that Obama did best Clinton in number of donors. By about a 2 to 1 margin. And what does that tell us?

It means, for one, that many Hillary donors have maxed out. And that many others are near maxed. I've thought for quite some time that Hillary has a lower ceiling than some of the other Dem candidates. She is not likely to draw in lots of new donors. And, once these folks have maxed out she will have hit that ceiling.

Obama, on the other hand, not only has a larger number of donors, but many more who have yet to max out. In fact, his average contribution was $250, versus $520 for Hillary.

What this means is that Obama is better positioned for sustained fundraising success. In addition, it clearly furthers the notion that Obama is more of a movement candidate than Clinton. A great deal has changed since 2004, when Dean's movement was short circuited by the establishment. But with an ascendant grassroots, the insider machinery will have a much more formidable task to derail Obama.