Before any votes, a 'money primary'

The race to raise funds, hire top staff, and generate media buzz for the 2008 presidential election is already well under way.

By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

from the February 26, 2007 edition

Page 1 of 2

WASHINGTON - It was "money, and only money," that led former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack to drop out of the 2008 presidential race last Friday. What the Democrat meant, of course, was a lack of money. Not hard work or desire.

Politicians often speak of fundraising with disdain, but in fact, the money that donors are willing to shell out to candidates represents an important signal of a candidate's viability. Even if much of the public is not fully engaged in the intense nomination races under way in both parties, wealthy donors are. And they're voting with their checkbooks.

It's all part of what's come to be known as the "invisible primary" – the early jockeying for money, top campaign staff, and high-profile endorsements that winnow the presidential field long before any caucuses or primaries are held. A fourth piece, media buzz, magnifies the effect of the other three.

"Organization, fundraising, and endorsements are all various forms of currency, or various bets on the probability that a candidate will finish first or in the [top three]" in the early nominating contests, says Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. "No one wants to endorse a candidate they know will have to drop out early or won't be able to raise money or convince a top-drawer management team to take on their campaign."

Mr. Vilsack knew going in that he faced an uphill climb. Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois were likely to run, and a third likely candidate, former vice presidential nominee John Edwards, had already built up a strong organization in Iowa, which will hold the first nominating contest next January. All three ended up declaring, and currently occupy the top three spots in most polls of Democratic primary voters.

For Vilsack, one big trouble sign came in polls of his home state, where he typically polled fourth among Democratic presidential wannabes. Though he was a popular two-term governor, with a centrist approach, he never was able to carve out a national image among his own people, and, lacking the charisma of an Obama or an Edwards, could not attract much attention (or money or media or endorsements) outside Iowa. In the Iowa caucuses, he had to finish well if not first to keep going. But as the hometown candidate, the moment he did well, the import of the Iowa caucuses would have been discounted. So in effect, he was in a no-win situation.

One beneficiary of Vilsack's decision could be Gov. Bill Richardson (D) of New Mexico, the only other candidate with executive experience in the race. Governor Richardson also brings Washington experience – as a former congressman and Energy secretary – as well as foreign policy credentials, as a former UN ambassador and still part-time globetrotter and hostage negotiator, to the table.

But Richardson is another candidate who could face viability problems soon if he does not show some chops in the fundraising department. As the sitting governor of a state far from the key money centers, Los Angeles and New York, it will be hard for him to raise the kind of serious money he needs. Still, he's already well ahead of where Vilsack was when he pulled out. Last week, Richardson raised $2 million in a single fundraiser. Vilsack had raised just $1.1 million in the last seven weeks of 2006, and had spent most of it by the end of the year.

Page 1 | 2 | Next Page