Can Obama Buy This Election?

[Tylergal]

By Leslie Sanchez
CNN Contributor
Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font

(CNN) -- As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama has proven he's "better, stronger, faster" than any other Democrat in the race. He's the Six-Hundred Million Dollar Man.
Commentator Leslie Sanchez discusses the advantages and disadvantages of Barack Obama's financing strategy.

Commentator Leslie Sanchez discusses the advantages and disadvantages of Barack Obama's financing strategy.

Last week, he opted out of the national campaign finance regime and is banking on his fundraising track record to build a war chest unlike any this country has seen since Richard Nixon's in 1972.

As the late Sen. Everett McKinley Dirksen once said, "A billion here, a billion there -- pretty soon you're talking real money." But what can Obama and the Democrats do with all the money they expect to raise?

The post-Watergate campaign rules, one national consultant reminded me, tried to keep both candidates in the general election to the same general level of spending. These rules, written largely by Democrats, were supposed to keep the playing field level by keeping the competition about ideas and issues, not who had the most money.

Is Obama trying to buy the election? He threatens to outspend McCain by six -- perhaps eight --- to one. Now, rather than engage in a "Great Debate" about America's future, Obama is trying to win through tactics.

Since Nixon, most candidates have followed a predictable strategy: Run an ideological campaign during the primaries to lock up your base -- then move to the center for the general election.

This allows resources to be husbanded for fall campaign spending to increase turnout among people who only might vote -- including self-described independents, youth voters and so-called presidential-year voters, who only come out "when it's really important."
Don't Miss

    * Obama, McCain gear up for race-based attacks
    * Commentary: Latino voters want a better idea of 'change'
    * ElectionCenter 2008
    * In Depth: Commentaries

A Nixon-sized war chest lets Obama smash the mold with a five-tiered campaign appealing to specific voter groups, each of whom responds to messages based on self-identification.

The first campaign will be aimed at traditional Democrats; Obama would have to run this one regardless of money on hand. It needs to appeal to traditional liberals -- upper income, highly educated urban and inner suburbanites are already behind Obama -- and traditional Democrats, the working class voters who helped Sen. Hillary Clinton win Ohio and Pennsylvania.

In this kind of campaign, the big question would normally be: "Do we run a 50-state campaign like Reagan '84 or do we campaign, like Bush and Kerry, based on the Electoral College?" Unlimited money means that's not a problem -- and Obama is free to launch four additional campaigns, the first aimed at Republicans.

His first post-primary TV spot is a case in point. While similar to Bill Clinton's first ad in the 1992 general election, it does more. One top Republican ad consultant I talked to said, "Obama jumped across the 50-yard line and is now on Republican turf" with that TV spot that speaks of tax cuts and welfare reform. ...These appeals will be countered strongly by Republicans who see this approach as disingenuous."

The next campaign is for African-Americans already excited by the first black presidential candidate. This key here is mobilization, which will occur largely in black churches using faith and values messages and on urban media, driving up turnout while still breaking eight or nine to one in favor of the Democrats.

Another campaign is targeted at Hispanics.

Obama has to go beyond the "Si Se Puede" (Yes, we can) farm workers message and You Tube hip-hop videos and discuss faith and values, pocketbook issues and military service if he expects to appeal to culturally conservative, business-minded Latino voters.

These voters gave George W. Bush 44 percent of their vote in 2004, but they don't like party labels and, candidly, don't much like the Republicans these days either after the congressional GOP's ham-handed attempts at anti-immigrant immigration reform.

The last is the biggest long shot: evangelicals, and Obama is already reaching out to them. Though thought of as "extremely conservative," they are broadening their concerns about social justice issues and the environment. Their new-realized concerns intersect with Obama's message, creating a coalition of interests that could prove useful.

As I alluded to earlier, an unlimited campaign war chest allows Obama and the Democrats to compete full out against the GOP in states where the Republicans are usually strong.

It also allows the Democrats to go toe-to-toe against the GOP in swing states like Missouri, Michigan and Colorado -- not to mention Ohio and Pennsylvania.

No matter how much America spends on presidential campaigns, it's less than what's spent on soft drink and snack food ads. With close to half a billion dollars available for the fall campaign, Obama can advertise himself like he was Lays Potato Chips or Coke Zero.

He can buy network television ads, not just regional "spots." And he can afford anything from O'Bobble-heads at the World Series to signage on the Goodyear Blimp.

He can buy ads in movie theaters or project campaign commercials on the sides of tall buildings during rush hour in America's biggest cities.

Despite all this, however, the cart still may be before the horse. Money isn't everything. If it were, Mitt Romney would be the Republican candidate, not John McCain. Obama needs to remember he outspent Hillary Clinton two-to-one in Texas and Ohio and three-to-one in Pennsylvania and still lost in those states -- badly.

McCain's fundraising numbers have improved considerably in the last few weeks. And the Republican National Committee has nearly 13 times more money for the fall election than the Democrats. It is true that Republicans tend to give more generously to institutions while Democrats tend to give, and in large amounts, to causes and candidates. But every voter nowadays is concerned about ethics in Washington and every candidate talks about it. And in this environment, is it possible to have too much money, no matter how you spend it?

Leslie Sanchez was director of the White House Initiative on Hispanic Education from 2001 to 2003 and is the author of "Los Republicanos: Why Hispanics and Republicans Need Each Other."

[caesu]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

[WhiskeyGirl]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

I've only seen one email regarding Obama that might be considered negative.

I wonder if the press or public will tire of hearing about all the "smears"?

Some of the smears, I've only heard of because of the debunking.

The one that comes to mind is "whitey".  I'm waiting for the tape to surface some day.  I'd imagine anyone with such a tape is trying to sell it (not on EBAY) to the highest bidder.  I think a "whitey" recording may exist for a number of reasons.  Could M.O. have said that word at some time in her life?  Maybe in the church, but not on the pulpit?  Perhaps in another location in the church? 

I'd also imagine they'd wait before the election to come out with anything really damaging.  To late for debunking or damage control.  An image of M.O. saying the word over and over, like the tower/plane footage of 911.  jmho

A townhall debat would be welcome.  Find out where the candidates stand on the issues, in their own word. 

Reality TV at it's best.

[Tylergal]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

Yes, and at this time during 1984, President Mondale had more support than Reagan and at this point in 2004, President Kerry had more popular support than Bush. 

Incidentally, McCain has more money right now in his funds than Obama.  So fact-check, Caseu.  Fact check.

[caesu]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

Yes, and at this time during 1984, President Mondale had more support than Reagan and at this point in 2004, President Kerry had more popular support than Bush. 

Incidentally, McCain has more money right now in his funds than Obama.  So fact-check, Caseu.  Fact check.

who are President Mondale and President Kerry exactly? please enlighten me on that part of history i might have missed.

the RNC has more money now.
but in february alone Obama raised 57 million.
so by opting out the public financing by the time the convention comes Obama can easily outspend McCain.

[Tylergal]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

Yes, and at this time during 1984, President Mondale had more support than Reagan and at this point in 2004, President Kerry had more popular support than Bush. 

Incidentally, McCain has more money right now in his funds than Obama.  So fact-check, Caseu.  Fact check.

who are President Mondale and President Kerry exactly? please enlighten me on that part of history i might have missed.

the RNC has more money now.
but in february alone Obama raised 57 million.
so by opting out the public financing by the time the convention comes Obama can easily outspend McCain.

Obviously, the statement is lost on you.  I am not talking about the RNC.  You obviously live in some kind of parallel universe where the ability to read and comprehend are not symbiotic.

[caesu]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

Yes, and at this time during 1984, President Mondale had more support than Reagan and at this point in 2004, President Kerry had more popular support than Bush. 

Incidentally, McCain has more money right now in his funds than Obama.  So fact-check, Caseu.  Fact check.

who are President Mondale and President Kerry exactly? please enlighten me on that part of history i might have missed.

the RNC has more money now.
but in february alone Obama raised 57 million.
so by opting out the public financing by the time the convention comes Obama can easily outspend McCain.

Obviously, the statement is lost on you.  I am not talking about the RNC.  You obviously live in some kind of parallel universe where the ability to read and comprehend are not symbiotic.

be more clear then.

you are talking about his private funds?
do you think McCain can outspend Obama by the time of the election?

only if he also won't accept public financing. but then he also stand no chance IMO.

[Tylergal]

he has more popular support than McCain.
people are willing to spend money on him because they don't want another GOP president.

McCain is lacking in such support. few people are willing to waste money on his campaign.

i would advise him too speak strongly against all the smear attacks by some of his supporters.
else he won't stand a change.
Obama has enough money for ads to debunk those smears.

Yes, and at this time during 1984, President Mondale had more support than Reagan and at this point in 2004, President Kerry had more popular support than Bush. 

Incidentally, McCain has more money right now in his funds than Obama.  So fact-check, Caseu.  Fact check.

who are President Mondale and President Kerry exactly? please enlighten me on that part of history i might have missed.

the RNC has more money now.
but in february alone Obama raised 57 million.
so by opting out the public financing by the time the convention comes Obama can easily outspend McCain.

Obviously, the statement is lost on you.  I am not talking about the RNC.  You obviously live in some kind of parallel universe where the ability to read and comprehend are not symbiotic.

be more clear then.

you are talking about his private funds?
do you think McCain can outspend Obama by the time of the election?

only if he also won't accept public financing. but then he also stand no chance IMO.

You don't have to outspend if you have the truth about "AMERICA" on your side but if you have Reverend Wright, Father Pfleger, Hamas, Brother Calypso Lewis Farakhan, William Ayers and the enclave of terrorists in the Middle East and England on your side, your picture is floating around in Muslim garb from your youth, you have videos in the internet of saying nobody is suffering more than the Palestineans, a book which is available to everyone where on page 261, he says he stands by the Muslims and then he is charging McCain with racism, when there has not been one iota out of McCain's campaign, then you need a lot of backtracking money to apologize to all those people who cling to their guns and bible who know there are not 57 states in this country.

[WhiskeyGirl]

I've often wondered how many ways people can manipulate an election?

Who really knows how many absentee/mail ballots go out and are returned? 

I think this is an area of opportunity open to everyone.

How many places require a picture id for voters?   I think it would be easy for one person to go to several places and vote.  Maybe not for the same name, but for names that are signed up at voter drives, through the mail or over the internet.  Who's checking id's?

I think this is an area of opportunity open to everyone.

I think there are many ways money and other things may be used to influence an election. 

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

Just a quick note...

Money and manipulation are opportunities for everyone, equal opportunities. 

jmho

[Tylergal]

I've often wondered how many ways people can manipulate an election?

Who really knows how many absentee/mail ballots go out and are returned? 

I think this is an area of opportunity open to everyone.

How many places require a picture id for voters?   I think it would be easy for one person to go to several places and vote.  Maybe not for the same name, but for names that are signed up at voter drives, through the mail or over the internet.  Who's checking id's?

I think this is an area of opportunity open to everyone.

I think there are many ways money and other things may be used to influence an election. 

jmho

We know for a fact that no military absentee ballots were counted in Florida in 2000 and their reason was that if the military on the USS Cole could not vote because of the loss of life then no one should vote in the military, just another way of manipulating the Florida vote, plus we know from USA, NYT and Washington Post that there were many, many dead voters and prisoners voting who were not eligible in Palm Beach County (of course they were voting for AlGore).  Makes one wonder, after having known the accurate count on 9/11/01 would have made Bush the winner even without the military votes and even with the dead Democrats and prisoners voting.