Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Obama by the numbers

I have been looking at the pollster.com site, which by the way, is packed with good information and I've noticed some trends in the Obama numbers.

Here's a link to the site for more information:


I'll use the polling numbers of the early voting states.

California 2007 January-June

32%--27%--25%--27%--25%--22% basically a down trend

Iowa 2007 January-June

17%--19%--20%--20%--19%--18% a slight uptrend, then back down

New Hampshire 2007 January-June

22%--23%--23%--22%--21%--21% a very slight tick up, then down

South Carolina 2007 January-June

12%--25%--24%--27%--26%--25% a huge rise, then small trend down

Florida 2007 January-June

13%--14%--15%--17%--18%--17% a small rise, then a slight trend down

New York 2007 January-June

13%--12%--14%--16%--13%--12% a small trend up, then back down

I bring this up because I think they point out an interesting fact as it relates to the Obama campaign. While raising nearly record breaking amounts of money during the 2nd quarter, he has shown down trends in all of the early states during that same quarter.

I don't think you can claim he is not a known name anymore. So, what accounts for the down trends in the polls while raising money? My opinion (and it's just mine) is this:

Barack Obama has a large number of people who support him intensely and fervently. But, this group, though large in terms of donor numbers, does not translate into people willing to say they would vote for him when polled. Obama has underperformed in the three major debates/forums. Maybe it's not his venue, but it's the one he has available to win people over. He's not doing that. His campaign has tried some questionable tactics to undermine others in the race and that has backfired.

All of this has put him where he is today - firmly in second place - all that money not withstanding. After all he's not going to buy the election and we Democrats wouldn't want that anyway.

Where he goes from here is anybodies guess. But, if things don't change he won't be the nominee in 2008.

Monday, July 02, 2007

Campaign Fund Raising

Well, it's all over the news. Barack Obama raised more money the Hillary Clinton in the second quarter. There's lots of crowing too from the Obama fan clubs. I have to wonder though, isn't he just the Democratic version of Mitt Romney? Raising all the money, and yet basically going nowhere in the polls?

To me that says exactly one thing. He has about 250,000 passionate followers willing to give his campaign lots and lots of money (like the Mormons are giving to Romney), but ultimately they form just a very small subset of the voting public (like the Mormons). That's why his poll numbers don't seem to reflect the campaign money he receives - like Romney in the Republican polls.

When this piece of news sinks in on the Democratic side, they will put the money race into perspective. It's just a part of the overall campaign to gain the nomination. More specifically, I think are the important factors of qualifications, effectiveness in the debates and forums, national appeal as well as state appeal in polls, organizational skills, ability to avoid self-inflicted wounds, and passion for the job are equally important. On all of these counts, Hillary Clinton is clearly doing the best among the Democratic candidates.

Time will tell, but I do not think all of Obama's money is going to translate into votes in the primaries and caucuses - remember Howard Dean? Can you say deja vu all over again?