2008 fundraising numbers boggle the mind

Seriously, if these numbers bear out, it'll be insane.

1. We're fairly certain that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) raised $12 million through the first of March. Banked means banked; pledges don't qualify. About half has come from online donations. If that figure is correct, and we have reason to believe that it is, Obama will probably amass northwards of $18 million this quarter, and we'll bet that he banks a little more than $13 million. Can Obama build a mid-to-small donor base in time to reap its rewards by the end of the 2nd quarter? Unclear.

2. Expect Sen. Hillary Clinton to transfer $11 million from her Senate campaign account into her presidential account. Informed donor-types believe that she's be able to raise more than $20 million in "new money," giving her a grand total of more than $32 million. One caveat: a not-small percentage of the new money has been shunted to Clinton's general election account and can't be used for the primaries. So expect Clinton to have roughly $16-20M cash on hand when she reports. How much Clinton raises in the second quarter will determine how large her fundraising network really is. Plenty of donors are hedging their bets.

3. Equivocal signs from Sen. John Edwards's camp. But a $12-15M quarter is reasonable. His second quarter matters more than his first quarter. He probably needs to raise just as much. His fundraising drop-off from Q1 to Q2 in 2003 hurt his campaign more than some of his advisers care to admit.

As Bowers wrote:

I am repeatedly struck by just how much larger the 2008 campaign currently appears than the 2004 campaign. The crowds are bigger--including an unbelievable 20,000 people for Obama in Austin. The fundraising is much bigger--Edwards is going to put up numbers roughly equal to Howard Dean in Q3 or Q4, and look as though he is lagging. Already, in just about eight or nine weeks, there has probably been twelve million dollars raised online between the candidates, and that is only going to get much, much bigger.

There are a couple of things I'll be looking at when these numbers will be reported. First of all, how many donors will each campaign have? A campaign heavy on $2,300 contributions may look good in Q1, but like Edwards learned in 2003, it leaves little for subsequent quarters. A campaign with lots of small dollar donors can continue hitting up those donors and build exponentially in further quarters. I suspect all three of the top-tier candidates -- Clinton, Edwards, and Obama will be heavy on the small dollar donors. Those candidates with the most will be in better shape (and if Obama clears $6 million online for the quarter, those are shockingly high numbers).

I will also be looking at the comparative numbers from the GOP side. The Hotline, which compiled these early figures, states that Republicans are more tight-lipped about their results. That's probably because they won't be anywhere near Democratic numbers. Progressives are genuinely excited about our candidates, while conservatives are looking around nervously saying, "is this it?", wondering whether the gods are playing a sick joke on them. I wouldn't be surprised to see our side outraise their side by a factor of two or even three, and again, watch those small donor numbers.

Finally, we'll get a bunch of people decrying the existence of big money in politics, and yes, that is obviously a problem. But what we're seeing with these numbers, especially if small donors are a big part of that, is an unprecedented level of excitement and engagement by regular people in their political process. If they're this stoked and engaged this far removed from election night 2008, just imagine how things will look like next year.

This is a good sign for our democracy and a good sign for our movement.