Gov. Richardson Raises $7 Million for Presidential Race

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 03:28:30 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The second quarter campaign revenue stats are coming in. Hillary's campaign raised in the neighborbood of $27 million, beating her first quarter total, and Obama is expected to equal or best that amount.

John Edwards is third with about $9 million and in 4th place, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has raised $7 million.

Richardson also grew his number of individual donors from the first quarter, from 24,270 to 38,000.

When do candidates like Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, who can't win, drop out and work for the benefit of the Democratic party instead of themselves?

I have always thought Richardson is campaigning for the VP slot on the ticket. So I'll give him a pass and say he should hang in there for now.

Related: HillCam is coming.

More...

Mrs. Clinton holds fundraisers in Florida before beginning a campaign swing in Iowa next week. And, perhaps in an homage to MTV’s “Real World,” the Clinton campaign unveiled a new feature on its Web site called “HillCam” which promises a “totally unvarnished, completely unprecedented” peek at Hillary and Bill Clinton as they campaign together across the Hawkeye State. The trailer advertising their webcam spots promises they will be “coming to a computer screen near you.”

< Holiday Weekend Traffic Blogging Part II | The Clamor For a Third Party >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Gov. Richardson Raises $7 Million for Presidential Race | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

When does Richardson drop out (none / 0) (#1)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 03:37:12 PM EST

He has no chance too.

Chris Dodd is a Senator who has the position to pressure Clinton and Obama on things like Reid-Feingold.

Richardson should drop out. He has no chance. Dodd is serving a purpose.

Utterly disagree with this post.

Agreed (none / 0) (#2)
by Dadler on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 03:46:05 PM EST

You do not ask the best and most powerful anti-war candidate in the field to drop out. Provided unity is the ultimate goal, no candidate should have to drop out until after a nomination is made. If, that is, the Dems could stand together once standing together is actually a genuine necessity.


: Kucinich isn't dropping out. eom (none / 0) (#13)
by Geekesque on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 05:02:06 PM EST

I think the goal (none / 0) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 03:54:07 PM EST

is to take back the White House from the Republicans. That takes money and individual supporters. At what point does a siphoning effect kick in?

it's not a zero sum game... (none / 0) (#4)
by selise on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:12:31 PM EST

this early, it's just not a zero sum game. people willing to donate money and time to dodd are not necessarily going to be willing to donate to one of the other candidates.

i really like what dodd is doing in pushing reform of the MCA.
kucinich is great on the war and on health care.

i like democracy. i wish there were more choices, not less.

the first primary isn't for months, most people haven't even started paying attention.

don't disagree with you much, but this time jeralyn - i really do.


I was really asking a question (none / 0) (#6)
by Jeralyn on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:20:34 PM EST

in my post as to when, not so much stating an opinion.


: Now would be right for (none / 0) (#9)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:36:55 PM EST

Gravel, Kucinich, Richardson and Biden imo.
I think they are not really adding much meaningful to the debate.
But as you no doubt imply, it is up to them of course.

Dodd at least (none / 0) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:18:36 PM EST

is not siphoning MUCH from anybody.

I do not really believe in the finite funds theory anyway.

But why do you want to throw out the candidate who has been best on IRaq in the camapaign? Throw out Richardson, he stinks as a candidate anyway.

And if Hillary wins, Obama is the VP candidate anyway.


I don't think (none / 0) (#7)
by Jeralyn on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:22:05 PM EST

Hillary will pick Obama as her running mate. Just a feeling. I think geography may play a role in who she would pick.


Oh I think she will (none / 0) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:35:39 PM EST

It is precisely the move that will insure she unifies the Party.

I think it is the smart move too. She could go West I think your implication is with Richardson.

That would be a BAD move imo because Richardson is a horrible campaigner, the worst I have seen in a long long time.

A thought for her would be Jim Webb.

He should be on everybody's shortlist imo.


My Guess (none / 0) (#10)
by squeaky on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:39:29 PM EST

Would be Edwards as her veep.


No way (none / 0) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:48:38 PM EST

Not a second time.


: Oh Right (none / 0) (#12)
by squeaky on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 04:55:15 PM EST

Technically it would have be the correct move, but it's been done....I knew that it had a familiar ring.
I think that you are right, Webb is the viable southern veep now. .

Webb isn't a good choice. (none / 0) (#14)
by Geekesque on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 05:05:34 PM EST

Democrats have a 51-49 majority on domestic issues and a 50-51 minority on foreign policy. That seat likely goes Republican if Webb leaves it.
Webb isn't a #2 type of candidate. He has too many strongly taken positions and is too blunt. He also doesn't have much stomach for campaigning. Webb would have lost to George Allen but for 'macaca.'

: Sounds Like Cheney (none / 0) (#15)
by squeaky on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 05:37:48 PM EST

He has too many strongly taken positions and is too blunt. He also doesn't have much stomach for campaigning.

: Point 1 (none / 0) (#16)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 05:54:15 PM EST

Good point. Rebuttal - Mark Warner? Your rebuttal to my rebuttal - John Warner retiring. My rebuttal to your rebuttal - Is there no other Dem that can hold the seat? Your rebuttal - Nope.
You win from the Dem perspective. but from the Hillary perspective, does she care?

Not one ballot cast yet Dodd's a spoiler -- NOT! (none / 0) (#17)
by aztrias on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 06:06:19 PM EST

Sorry but money isn't votes. Dood has every right and business to raise money and seek the votes of citizens in a primary.

Senator Gramm of Texas had amassed 22 M in the 80's and got his butt creamed in the primaries.

Dodd doesn't have to win a national vote -- he has to compete in Iowa and then NH and do well for the money spent.

Clinton lost NH and called himself "the comeback kid".