TPM Reader TP …
There needs to be some attention paid to the fact Hillary Clinton didn’t actually compete head-to-head on a level playing field with Barak Obama. Does any one honestly think Hillary would have raised $26 million without the help of her husband Bill? The Clinton campaign needs to be pressed on how much Hillary raised at her events and how much was raised by Bill. I suspect she would have reported something close to what Edwards did, $14 million. The New York Times reported last week that Bill was was used in 17 fundraisers over the course of 6 weeks by the Clinton campaign this quarter. Lets say he only raises a quarter million at each event, which is low balling it considerably, he brings in $4.25 million. Barak on the other hand raised $26 million without the star power of the biggest name in democratic politics. Even more so, the Clinton campaign did not report the overwhelming first quarter numbers they were widely expected to report. The media needs to question why Clinton only reported raising money from only 50,000 contributors when there have been news reports she has access to a list of 250,000 supporters her and Bill have maintained over 20 years. And the American people need to ask themselves if its fair that Bill finances his wife’s campaign.
These comments clearly get on to some very dicey territory. And in Hillary’s defense I think it’s fair to say that on the national stage Hillary became Hillary at about the same time Bill became Bill, if that makes sense. This isn’t quite the same as a famous political parent giving a child a boost up into political office.
The key though is that this is all beside the point. Life isn’t fair and most fields aren’t level. Whether it’s the name or the history or the fundraising gusto, this is a big advantage she brings to the campaign. Or that’s how it seemed. I don’t think anybody thought Hillary would be the most challenging of the candidates or the most inspiring or the most exciting. The idea is or was (I’m not sure) that she’s been on the national stage for going on twenty years. She’s experienced and tested in high stakes politics and — and this is the key part — whatever pizzazz or excitement some newcomer might bring to the race she could overwhelm them with organization and money. (Like Gore and Mondale, and Dole and Bush and every other annointed frontrunner.) Why that’s the case doesn’t really matter. But if she can’t do that, if Obama can over-match her on her key strength, then the outlook for her whole candidacy looks very different.
