The paper's editors let op-Ed scribe George Smith get away with this gem:
Money drives your votes and rarely does the underfunded candidate win.Smith is free to make whatever prediction he wants.
Sen. Susan Collins has raised $3.6 million for her 2008 re-election campaign while her Democratic challenger, U.S. Rep. Tom Allen, struggles along with just $2.2 million. Although she has one-third more money than Allen, Collins won't win by that margin. More like 10 to 12 percent.
But in an era where party money, DSCC and NRSC money and independent expenditures all matter, his suggestion that a campaign's health can be distilled down to one number is silly.
And his claim that "rarely does the underfunded candidate win" is just plain wrong.
There were 32 senate races in 2006 (Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) ran unopposed). Of those 32, the candidate with less money won in eight. (Scroll down to "Candidate Receipts and Party Spending in All Senate Races, 2006" for a .PDF.)
That's nowhere near a majority, granted. But the 8 for 32 figure demonstrates pretty clearly that while money matters, it isn't destiny.
As I said, Smith is entitled to his opinion. But I wish Kennebec Journal's editors would hold him to the facts.
1 comment:
And how many of those with more money that lost were incumbents? Chafee? George Allen? Santorum? And don't forget about Joe Lieberman, Collins BFF who is giving her money this year.
Post a Comment