Starting Gate: Raise Now, Ask Questions Later?
2264960Presidential campaigns are under immense pressure to raise boatloads of cash to finance their efforts both for the primaries and, eventually, the general election. But do they not think journalists are going to uncover a few rotten apples in all those bushels? Or do they just think voters will chalk it all up to politics as usual?
We haven't yet reached the fourth quarter of the year but we've had a bundle of such stories already. Most recently the spotlight has shone on the Democratic field (don't think Republicans will go unscathed but the fact is, they are raising far less money so far). Hillary Clinton returned $850,000 in donations linked to Norman Hsu, a big Democratic donor who, it turns out, was also a fugitive from the law. Yesterday, it was revealed that one of the top bundlers for John Edwards is heading to prison for his role in a legal scheme at his law firm.
Today, the Washington Post's John Solomon and Matthew Mosk take a broader look at the issue, noting that Clinton's donors include some linked to scandals of the past – including William Stuart Price, an oilman who testified under oath that he previously had donated to former President Bill Clinton in an attempt to "gain influence" with his administration.
Hey, when you're trying to raise hundreds of millions of dollars, you can't catch all the bad seeds right? Democratic strategist Steve McMahon tells the Post, "anytime you have a community that includes this many people, it's idealistic but unrealistic to expect that none of them will have any taint of political concern. … The challenge facing these campaigns is determining what those concerns might be in advance of them becoming known." But with so many of these stories, the betting may be that voters understand that challenge – and that they can always jettison questionable connections down the road.
Who's The Conservative Candidate? Fred Thompson was supposed to fill that bill for restless GOP primary voters but he's finding a cooler reception than most anticipated. Thompson's campaign suffered another potential blow when the Associated Press obtained an e-mail from evangelical leader James Dobson castigating the former Tennessee senator.
Dobson, chairman of the influential group Focus on the Family, wrote in an e-mail to friends: ""Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail? He has no passion, no zeal and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"
That's going to leave a mark.
Obama's Message: Barack Obama is up with a new ad in Iowa. Instead of the traditional red meat for Democratic activists, the ad takes up the central theme of Obama's candidacy, but one that sounds like a message better tailored for independent voters in New Hampshire than Democrats in Iowa:
"Every time I speak about my hope for America, the cynics in Washington roll their eyes. You see, they don't believe we can actually change politics and bring an end to decades of division and deadlock. They don't believe we can limit the power of lobbyists who block our progress, or that we can trust the American people with the truth." The ad ends with, "I approve this message to ask you to believe — not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington. I'm asking you to believe in yours."
Around The Track