Clinton will likely surpass her first quarter fundraising haul.
WASHINGTON (CNN) - Sen. Hillary Clinton will likely surpass her presidential fundraising haul of $26 million collected in the first quarter of 2007 by about $1 million, the New York Democrat's presidential campaign spokesman stated Thursday in a blog posted on her campaign website.
"We expect to bring in what we did in the First Quarter, or slightly more, which would put us in the range of $27 million," wrote Howard Wolfson, Clinton's communication director. "To put that figure in some perspective, it is more than any Democrat has ever raised in the second quarter of the 'off' year."
But Wolfson added that the Clinton campaign expects one of her chief rivals, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, to outraise them in the second quarter.
"While that figure is record setting, we do expect Senator Obama to significantly outraise us this quarter," he wrote.
Oftentimes, campaigns will seek to lower projections on their own fundraising goals, while seeking to increase expectations of their opponents. There are still three days remaining for campaigns to raise money before the books on the second quarter close Saturday at midnight.
An Obama campaign official did tell CNN Thursday morning that the Illinois Democrat has more than doubled the number of new individual contributors to his presidential campaign in the second quarter, and has a goal of 250,000 unique contributors by Saturday night.
Obama reported raising $25 million in the first quarter of 2007. He is expected to at least match and will likely show that he has exceeded that fundraising number when the final figures are made public.
– CNN Political Editor Mark Preston
The culture of corruption at its finest..
All this emphasis on huge amounts of money raised shows why we need some positve changes in how we conduct campaigns. Two ideas: restore the fair and equal time on television reguirement for candidates for office; put into law Senator Durbin's great idea on providing vouchers for TV time for candidates. (Shouldn't we really be talking about the issues, and not the amount of $$ raised? And, yes, I want my choice, John Edwards, to be able to compete, so I hope he makes his goal of what he needs for the campaign. Grassroots can do the rest.)
Good! That means we can get another puppet for the corporations in the Whitehouse. Hillary is a huge hypocrite. If the democrates nominate someone who voted for the Iraq war then they all should get their heads examined.
Yep you guys got it. Makes me extremely skeptical as to whether or not there is any real difference between these candidates and Bush.
They can try to deny it all they want but the only way that kind of cash can be raised is to pander to the big $ lobbies.
Well at least Clinton and Obama weren't the CEO of an oil corporation or sat on the board of directors for Chevron – like the Bush gang.
Lesser of two evils?
Please educate yourself. Obama has denied funding from lobbyists and PACs.
Obama has grassroot support from the largest donor base in history.
So please do not make baseless comments and claim that Obama is in bed with lobbyists.
That is true, Sen. Obama has refused to take money from PACs or Lobbyists. This money is from the America people. I agree we need reform, and so does Sen. Obama, but at least we is doing it the honest way.
As for Edwards, he can compete as long as Ann Coulter says something mean to him or his wife every quarter right.
Clinton, Obama both of you lost me as a possible vote for 2008. How could you agree with this immigration bill.
John Edwards of course has had my vote from day one and NOTHING short of him robbing a bank will change my mind. Whether his wife goes up against that WITCH, for lack of other word, Ann Coulter, I am for John Edwards and if he does not get nomination, then I am a independent.
I think that the federal government should make small business owners check any potential employees as to whether he is illegal resident or not. I know that their papers are possibly fake, but with government backing, the owner can be more aggressive in checking.
One question for the haters up top...what’s wrong with taking money the honest way from Americans who have hope in a candidate. Just because you look at your candidate’s in a skeptical way does not mean the people who support these candidates have to. Why do we always look for scandal and not the issues? Please you’re wasting your time support whomever you choose and bring facts to the table. Not useless hate without any proof. What if Mr.Obama is 100% clean and true about whom he is. Would you take back your statements? I don’t think you would you would look for something else that has nothing to do with the individual. Go Obama 08, your proving everyday that you are a force in this campaign and you will make World History! Go Obama!
Alen Keyes was right. If the media would do thier job and show the American people who the candidates are, they would not need to raise money to get air time. We're in a sad place.
I wish we could get Alen Keyes as president with Ron Paul as Vice-President...
That kind of money comes from lobby groups. She never raised that from individual citizens. Hillary and Bill are at it again, and who will they owe this time? What favors will they hand out when and if elected?
She favors amnesty, voted for the Iraq war, and is a big proponent of outsourcing. The lobby groups and funding her. So how is this any different from what we have right now?
Mike: I stand corrected. Did not realize that Obama refused funds from PAC's or lobbies.
Though I still don't understand how he could have raised that much money from individual donors?
One tactic is the have money "floated" from individuals that really work on behalf of a lobby, corporation or other interest.
The laws are murky at best on campaign financing with very little accountability.
Still better than Bush whom ran several oil firms, Cheney who still gets 20 million package from Halliburton and Rice who sat on the board for Chevron – has an oil supertank named in her honor.
There are 300 million people in this country. Get even 1% to donate $10 per quarter and you're at $30 million each quarter. It's not that hard.
When you contribute to Barack Obama's campaign you have to attest to the fact that you are :
1) A lawful citizen
2) That the donation is not coming from the general treasury fund of a corporation, labor orgaization or bank.
3) That the money does not come from a political action committee.
4) That is doesn't come from the treasury of of a person who is a federal contractor.
5) That is doesn't come from the funds of a federal lobbyist of foreign agent or an entity that is a federally registered lobbying firm.
6)That the donation was not provided to you by another person or entity.
Obama has raised money from ordinary people who see him as the vehicle for real change in this country. The grassroots support for this man is unparelleled.
Can Hillary say that?
They're out flying around campaigning and raising money for the election all the time, meanwhile Ron Paul stays in Washington all week DOING HIS JOB, and then campaigns on the weekend. Laf.
If the dems nominate Hillary, they're just as self destructive as we've always suspected.
I think that Barack Obama's integrity really shows when he refuses to take money from PAC's and special interest groups. The only special interest group that he adheres to is the American People.
Remember what happened to Howard Dean. A lot of grass roots support, a great speaker but very little substance. Sounds similar to the Obama cult to me.