October 21, 2009 07:59 PM UTC

Winners and Losers from Q3 Fundraising Period

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

The 2010 election is more than a year away, and most polls at this point in any race are about as accurate as career advice from Jay Cutler. So for political junkies, the quarterly fundraising reports are the best way to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of an individual campaign.

The amount of money a candidate raises is a good indicator of the level of support they have. We’ve said it again and again: Donors give money to candidates who they think can win, so candidates who raise a lot of money are perceived to have a strong chance of winning. The stronger you appear to be as a candidate, the more money you will raise, and the better you’ll look…which means you’ll raise even more money. And round and round we go.

But total fundraising isn’t the only important nugget you can mine from a quarterly report; just as important is the cash on hand figure, which takes into account how much a campaign is spending and, therefore, how well the operation is being run overall. For example, in the 2006 State Treasurer race, both Democrat Cary Kennedy and Republican Mark Hillman accepted voluntary spending limits, which limited the amount of money they could raise and spend to around $500,000. Kennedy scrimped and saved every penny of that total so that she could purchase as much television time as possible.

Conversely, Hillman’s quarterly reports showed early on that his campaign was burning through cash at an alarming rate, and his failure to adequately balance his campaign checkbook probably cost him the election. Kennedy ended up having significantly more money to spend on TV than Hillman, who had spent about a third of his warchest on other things. By July 2006, it was already clear that Kennedy was going to have a huge advantage heading into the last two months.

That was a long way of saying that, yes, campaign finance reports do matter and do tell us a lot about candidates and their campaigns. So let’s take a look at the winners and losers from Q3. Not all campaigns are represented below – just those that really caught our eye.

WINNERS

Jane Norton

The leader in the clubhouse for the GOP Senate nomination confirmed her credentials as a top contender with an impressive haul in just a few weeks. Norton raised more than a half-million dollars in just 16 days, which is considerably more money than any other Republican contender for Senate had thus far been able to raise in an entire quarter. Norton’s impressive 16 days of raising money is a prime example of how fundraising can be so important for a candidate, because it instantly proved that she was the candidate to beat for the Republicans.

Scott McInnis

The Republican contender for Governor had the best quarter of anybody not named Michael Bennet, raising an impressive $550,000 to lead all candidates for governor. McInnis has had a tough couple of months, filled with self-inflicted wounds and odd gaffes, but his ability to raise a ton of money really lessens the impact of those mistakes. If McInnis can continue to raise money at this pace, it will be tough to beat him in a primary.

Sen. Michael Bennet

Bennet raised more than a million dollars for the third straight cycle, which adds to his reputation as a sterling fundraiser. His primary opponent, Andrew Romanoff, didn’t do particularly well in a short period of time, so when you compare the two candidates-particularly people watching the race in Washington D.C.-Bennet continues to look like a strong candidate.

Bill Ritter

Yes, McInnis outraised the Governor, but Ritter’s strong Q3 report of $452,000 helps him to fight concerns that his popularity is waning. Ritter doesn’t need to out raise McInnis or Josh Penry because he doesn’t have to worry about a Democratic primary; everything he brings in can be saved for the general election.

Ed Perlmutter

Perlmutter should be a permanent presence on this list, as he continues to hoard cash at an impressive rate. Perlmutter has $911,736 cash on hand after Q3, despite not having a credible likely opponent until a week ago. Now that Republican Ryan Frazier has entered the race, expect Perlmutter to up his fundraising efforts to make sure he blows the challenger out of the water in Q4.  This kind of cash on hand will make Perlmutter a very tough guy to beat, and it will make the NRCC think twice about putting a lot of resources against him.

LOSERS

Ryan Frazier

It’s no mystery why Frazier bowed out of the U.S. Senate race to run in CD-7: He can’t raise money, and he doesn’t know what to do with the money he has. Frazier raised a meager $140,000 in his first fundraising quarter, and in Q3 he brought in an anemic $70,846. But the truly amazing thing about his Q3 report is that Frazier spent $77,986. That’s right – he spent $7,000 more than he raised in Q3, leaving him $120,107 cash on hand. Of course, that money transfers over to his race for congress in CD-7, but Frazier has showed without a doubt that he really isn’t ready to handle a federal campaign.

Scott Gessler

Really, it’s time for Gessler to just hang it up. The Republican candidate for Secretary of State turned in another bizarre fundraising quarter, raising $29,785 but somehow spending $24,145. In total, Gessler has now raised $67,130 and spent $55,175. He has spent 82% of the money he has raised, and the election is still more than a year away. Who’s running this campaign? Andrew Boucher? The sad thing for Republicans is that incumbent Bernie Buescher isn’t exactly burning up the fundraising trail, with a weak $25,340 cash on hand. But we’ll give Buescher the advantage for not spending 8 of every 10 dollars he raises.

Andrew Romanoff

Romanoff is the big loser for Q3 for a couple of reasons. His campaign inexplicably reported that he had raised about $200,000 in 21 days, when in fact he had raised closer to $300,000 once all the receipts were counted. This is an inexcusable mistake for a campaign that can’t afford them, because the difference in perception between $200k and $300k is significant to casual observers and potential donors around the country. $200,000 is not an impressive figure for someone who was billed as being such a popular politician, but $300,000…well, that’s a lot different. But the big blow came from seeing Norton’s announced total of $505,000 in just 16 days, which eliminated any rationale for Romanoff raising a smaller amount. It’s not a stretch to say that Romanoff’s first financial report could prove devastating to his campaign in the long run because it shattered the perception of Romanoff as a hugely popular politician.  

Cory Gardner

The presumptive GOP nominee in CD-4 had a strong first fundraising effort in Q2, but his Q3 was another story. Gardner raised a ho-hum $188,701, but more importantly, he spent $92,416. Gardner has already spent almost a third of what he has raised in total, which is a terrible burn rate for a candidate who won’t be able to raise much money once the state legislative session begins in January (unless Gardner resigns from the legislature, which he may have to do at this point). Considering that incumbent Democrat Betsy Markey is on pace to finish 2009 with a million dollars cash on hand, Gardner can’t afford to be using his campaign ATM card this much.

Martin Beeson

Stick a fork in him. Beeson’s $5,640 Q3 effectively ends any chance he had at being a serious challenger to incumbent Rep. John Salazar in CD-3. Obviously Beeson doesn’t have the connections or the inclination to raise serious money, and this pathetic report will completely drop him off of any list being kept by potential national supporters.

Josh Penry

It’s hard to call someone who raised $419,000 a “loser” in this category, but fundraising numbers are all relative compared to your opponents. Penry might have had a good quarter by most standards, but the bottom line is that he came in third in a field of three.