So I admit it: I fell for it.
I went to the Huffington Post yesterday, after reading about Obama raising $40 million in March. I knew that sources had already indicated that Clinton got outraised 2 to 1. But then I saw the Huffington Post headline reading "Clinton's raise $50 million"
I thought to myself, wait a tick - I thought Obama raised more?
Then I realized that the timing of this information was deliberate.
More after the fold.
Huffington Post and NYT both have front page stories on the money that the Clinton's raised.
The point is to get the number $100 million and the word Clinton into the heads of voters. That way they'll compare those numbers and letters to those of $40 million and Obama.
Its a simplistic game based on the idea of a simplistic electorate. Whether or not that's the right strategy is an open question.