SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ~digs who wrote (2389)7/16/2007 12:30:25 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 149317
 
A Foundation Built on Small Blocks
_____________________________________________________________

Growing Internet Use Helps Obama to a Wide Base and a Money Lead

By Jose Antonio Vargas
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 16, 2007

A few weeks ago, Linnie Frank Bailey, a 51-year-old self-described "older soccer mom" in Corona, Calif., and Isaac Burbank, a 20-year-old mechanical engineering student at Colorado State University, both did something for the first time.

They gave money to a political campaign -- $10 each to Sen. Barack Obama -- and they gave it over the Internet.

The Illinois Democrat's second-quarter fundraising haul of $32.8 million far outpaced the rest of the presidential field, including his chief Democratic rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. About a third of it -- $10.3 million -- came over the Internet, according to the Obama campaign, and 90 percent of the online donations were under $100. Half were $25 or less.

The number of small donors gives Obama an unusually large fundraising base. The 258,000 donors who have given to his campaign this year are more than the combined total who have given to three of the leading Republican candidates: former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). Clinton, who raised $27 million in the second quarter and leads most Democratic polls, has yet to release her number of donors.

Touting his success, Obama said his fundraising effort is "the largest grass-roots campaign in history for this stage of a presidential race." Jerome Armstrong, an Internet adviser for Howard Dean's insurgent campaign four years ago, didn't dispute that.

"What we're seeing here is Obama's broad, wide, mainstream appeal, and he's bringing in new people . . . people who aren't necessarily political junkies who follow the blogs," said Armstrong, who is the founder of the blog MyDD.

Dean, the former Vermont governor whose opposition to the Iraq war helped generate huge online support, raised $25 million over the Internet during his ultimately losing campaign for the 2004 Democratic nomination. Obama amassed about $17 million online in the first two quarters of the year.

But the Internet of 2003, said Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Internet & American Life Project, is not the Internet of 2007. YouTube and MySpace, for example, weren't factors in the last presidential election. More households, particularly minority households, are going online.

A Pew study released last month found that since 2005, the percentage of African American adults with a broadband connection has nearly tripled, from 14 percent in early 2005 to 40 percent earlier this year. "Folks online are doing things they've never done before," said Rainie, and that includes donating money to political campaigns.

Bailey, the first-time donor, who is black, is one of the 58 members of the Obama support group on Eons, a MySpace-like creation ("Lovin' life on the flip side of 50") geared toward baby boomers. "At first," she said, "I felt that people who give money to campaigns are the big-moneyed people, the businesspeople, the Hollywood people. But on his Web site, Obama is asking for smaller donations -- as little as $10, maybe $25 -- so I didn't feel that bad. I thought, 'Okay, here's one less trip to McDonald's.' "

The low-dollar contributions, Obama's aides say, is a sign of the breadth of the candidate's appeal. It's also a part of Obama's overall strategy: Bring 'em in, ask for more. There is a $2,300 limit for contributions to an individual candidate in the primaries, and the fact that many donors have given relatively small amounts means Obama can keep coming back to them.

As Julius Genachowski, Obama's chief technology adviser, put it: "The technology now has made it a lot easier for everyday people to participate. It's made it easier for campaigns, too. The technology allows us to build a platform and see if people come."



To: ~digs who wrote (2389)7/17/2007 4:44:43 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Handicapping the Presidential Race - Democrats

alittlereality.blogspot.com



To: ~digs who wrote (2389)7/21/2007 12:04:14 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 149317
 
Why is Obama So Strong?

richardreeves.com

By Richard Reeves
Syndicated Columnist
JULY 18, 2007

NEW YORK — When I left the country for a few weeks of summer travel overseas, the conventional wisdom was that the phenomenon of 2007, Barack Obama, had plateaued and was on his way to becoming a fascinating footnote in Hillary Clinton's methodical march to the Democratic nomination for president.

In fact, I more or less thought that myself. The senator from New York was collecting money like a big church in Texas. She was supported by most of the party's weary mandarins. She was the kind of programmed and practiced candidate, to the point of boredom, who was unlikely to make many mistakes — and it is usually blunders that decide elections. Obama, charming and likable, seemed more likely to be Gary Hart than John F. Kennedy.

Wrong!

I came back, and there was Obama on the cover of most every serious magazine in the country. Newsweek placed him over the headline, "How Barack Obama Is Shaking Up the Campaign." More interesting, he was the cover of the conservative American Spectator over the line, silver-plated, "An Age of Obama?"

Why? Polls indicated that Clinton had withstood the challenge, holding a 10-point lead among Democrats over the young senator from Illinois. ("Young" is relative; Obama is three years older than Kennedy was when he was elected president.) But still, he was getting larger crowds, raising more money. Most important, he was raising that money from more than twice as many donors. People wanted to be part of this thing.

Why?

I think the answer was in a one-paragraph item at the bottom of page A19 of last Tuesday's New York Times. The paper reported that approval levels for Washington, both the presidency and the Congress, were at all-time lows, generally below 20 percent.

At the same time, other polls indicated that more that 75 percent of Americans answer "no" when asked whether "the country is going in the right direction."

And why not? We are sending young men and women, and reservists not so young, to die or be maimed in a foolish and unnecessary war. The great majority of the nation believes (or knows) that, but in Washington the president will never admit it, and the Congress does not have the courage to shout that the emperor has no clothes. The air in the war capital is thick with delusion and lies.

It is not just the war. The chief law enforcement officer of the country, the attorney general, is obviously incompetent, a fool or a liar — probably all three. No one has really done anything about that, either.

Then there is science, all the disciplines that depend on exact truth, real provable facts, and on openness and transparency of results. Science is a cumulative, serial effort in which the work or discoveries or theories of one person or group provide the facts and platform for the next. On the day I returned home, a former surgeon general of the United States sat before Congress and said, under oath, that the people running the country, or at least the executive branch, are deliberately hiding the truth about a range of scientific subjects from global warming to stem cell research.

"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is often ignored, marginalized or simply buried," said Dr. Richard Carmona, who served as the government's chief medical officer from 2001 to 2005. "I was blocked at every turn. Stand down. Don't talk about it."

It sounded very much like the Middle Ages. This is America? This my country?

Barack Obama is an attractive, intelligent, thoughtful man — perhaps the campaign will show him to be too thoughtful — who because of race and background is the candidate who symbolizes change, a new direction to a nation seemingly convinced we are on the wrong path.

Are his politics that different from, say, Hillary Clinton's? Probably not. But he can claim to come from a different place, and she is clearly part of the establishment, the established order.

Obama seems new. To an American coming home, he seems not to be offering just a new choice, but a second chance. He may fade — stuff happens — but a new chance may be enough in a country full of disillusion.

________________________________________

-Richard Reeves, Senior Lecturer at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California, is an author and syndicated columnist whose column has appeared in more than 100 newspapers since 1979.