: National attention…
If I were advising one of the Democratic candidates for president, I’d be pushing those tactics that help build a national reputation. Campaign politics is, in part, a game of percentages. And the percentage that the Mayer predictive model of primary campaigns highlights is difficult to dismiss: Since 1980 the candidate that “wins” the last national Gallup poll before the Iowa caucuses wins the nomination. Gary Hart was the lone exception (for obvious reasons) making this model nearly 100 percent accurate so far.
Crowing about fund raising is a good way to gain that attention because the press pays so much attention to it (it’s easy to tell a story with dollar figures). Howard Dean has been crowing about his fundraising and has begun a blogging marathon to reach the campaign’s $15 million goal this quarter. PoliticalWire notes that it is “particularly interesting that no other candidate is drawing attention to his or her fundraising.”
I’ll certainly agree that Dean has the best *campaign* so far, especially in terms of fundraising.
I think you’re also right about the fact that it’s an effective way to capture media attention.
I’m not sure that fundraising will necessarily translate into popular appeal in the primaries and polls simply because Dean still has that pesky “McGovern” problem. And I think that Clark may be able to pass him pretty quickly in the fundraising department.
Quite possibly, yes. Right now, however, with so many Americans still unclear about who some of these candidates are, any national attention should be worth an uptick in the polls. And, if the Mayer model holds, this race only lasts 3 more months.
I think you are right that Clark may have some heavy-weight fundraising potential. And, if so, he’ll get lots of legitimizing attention.