My Vote Don't Cost A Thing

One lesson of the GOP race, Patrick Ruffini argues - a race that McCain is about to win despite raising less than half of the $100 million some observers thought it would take to get the nomination - is that in the age of internet mobilization, how a candidate raises money might matter more than how much he raises.

Comments

This seems rather silly ... McCain's win has much more to do with his strong name recognition and the divided field.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | February 2, 2008 10:42 AM

I agree with Nicholas. The only reason McCain was able to get away with raising relatively little money is... every Republican raised very little money, even counting Romney's self-loans.

McCain got incredibly lucky, as you yourself have pointed out, Ross.

Republicans should be very, very concerned going into the general election. Especially if Obama is the nominee, I wouldn't be surprised if the Democratic nominee more than doubled McCain's fundraising for the general election. The energy levels, as seen by the radical imbalance in voter turnout so far (including Dems outdrawing Republicans in South Carolina!), are favoring Dems in a big, big way.

Posted by matthewcc | February 2, 2008 11:20 AM

Perot, Forbes, vs Ventura, Huckabee. We know that earned media and idealistic supporters, if used skillfully, can be much more effective than uninspired high-cash campaigns.

That said, Rasmussenreports still gives me hope that the primary race isn't a done deal for McCain. While big spending campaigns don't win it for you, they don't lose it for you either. In 1999-2000, GWBush bragged about his fundraising success, and had a big expensive campaign, and he turned out just fine.

Posted by Gyrd | February 2, 2008 2:37 PM

Ruffini doesn't make an argument so much as throw out some observations. Certainly you can't argue the innovative fundraising or energized grassroots had much to do with McCain's success. Personally I think that name recognition and an extremely friendly media had much to do with it.

Posted by bbartlog | February 2, 2008 3:16 PM

It was the debates. There has never been so many televised primary debates. The people who watched them talked about them and blogged about them and sent money to the people that inspired them. And there has never been such scrutiny, as George Allen found out the hard way.
The last Democratic debate got over 8 million viewers, a record.
The more they see, the Republican base is turned off.
The more they see, the Democratic base is turned on.
This kind of transparency, which is here to stay in the digital age, is not the GOP's cup of tea.

Posted by fougasseu | February 2, 2008 3:54 PM

Nonsense. This race is ALL about the lack of any credible Republican candidate that the base can rally around. McCain wins by default.

Posted by big | February 3, 2008 12:48 AM

? How much money does McCain have and where is he getting his money from? Truly from normal everyday people, as in the case of Ron Paul?

Posted by pb | February 3, 2008 3:21 AM

I agree with Nicholas. The only reason McCain was able to get away with raising relatively little money is... every Republican raised very little money, even counting Romney's self-loans.

Having the media anoint a 'come-back' after finishing fourth in Iowa was the turning point in the McCain campaign.

Posted by sdh | February 4, 2008 7:04 PM