Senate '08: Third Quarter Money Numbers
Fundraising reports for the U.S. Senate campaigns aren't due until October 15, but the Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick campaigns released their numbers today.
Here's the box score. Dollar totals are rounded to the nearest thousand (as they were released.)
| Steve Novick | Jeff Merkley | |
| Entered Campaign | April 18 | August 1 |
| Days in Race | 166 days | 61 days |
| Third Quarter | $125,000 | $294,000 |
| Total Raised | $322,000 | $294,000 |
| Cash On Hand | $218,000 | $215,000 |
| Contributors | 1300 | 720 |
| Average Donation | $246 | $408 |
| Fundraising Pace | $1939/day | $4819/day |
No word yet on Gordon Smith's numbers, nor John Frohnmayer's. We'll update when those become available.
Discuss.
|
October 5, 2007 |
in the news 2007 | Comments (83 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 5, 2007 4:42:27 PM
Hmmm.
I was thinking Merkley would raise a lot more than this. Al Franken for example raised $1.89 million in the third quarter which is more than six times what Merkley raised. Granted Franken has a lot more exposure and name ID and contacts to tap, but I would have hoped that someone in this race not named Smith would have been able to raise at least half the amount Franken if this really is a top-tier race.
Posted by: James X. | Oct 5, 2007 4:51:12 PM
As of the end of the last quarter, Gordon Smith had $3.5M cash on hand.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 5, 2007 4:51:35 PM
As you note, Jeff Merkley isn't a well-known national celebrity like Al Franken.
But it also wasn't Franken's first quarter. Fundraising large sums of money takes time. You don't just sit down with a phone list of your high school buddies and ask 'em for money. You build a system, an infrastructure first, and then the money starts to roll in. Takes a little time.
(Full disclosure: My firm hosts Jeff Merkley's website, but I speak only for myself.)
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 5, 2007 5:03:32 PM
Also, Minnesota has 5.1 million people as compared to Oregon's 3.6 - so an Oregon campaign will require less funding for TV time too.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 5:04:09 PM
"But it also wasn't Franken's first quarter. Fundraising large sums of money takes time."
Actually, the opposite is often true. Your first quarter is when you hit up everybody you know, everyone you've helped along the way. After that it gets harder; you have to convince people.
Any reason for the box score format, other than giving Mr. Merkley a break for being in the race fewer days?
Posted by: sean cruz | Oct 5, 2007 5:20:54 PM
Me, I'm just happy that these two fine candidates are in the race, almost an embarassment of riches.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 5, 2007 5:23:54 PM
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 5, 2007 5:03:32 PMAlso, Minnesota has 5.1 million people as compared to Oregon's 3.6 - so an Oregon campaign will require less funding for TV time too.
Yes, but is Oregon is physically larger (more expensive to barnstorm).
That said, even if Merkely doubles his take exponentially for the next two quarters he is still raising less than in the MN race for Q3 alone (Franken's Q2 numbers were even higher than his Q3).
Not slamming Merkley, but neither Novick or Merkley are pulling in the serious money it will take to unseat Smith or make this race top-tier. The question is, why does it seem the numbers for both are so anemic and what can be done to land bigger totals for both/either?
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 5:30:28 PM
I'm sorry, I have something else to ask:
"(Full disclosure: My firm hosts Jeff Merkley's website, but I speak only for myself.)"
This really isn't true anymore, is it? You're also an official blogger for the campaign, having covered the kickoff for Merkley for Senate.
Maybe you should say "On BLUE OREGON I only speak for myself."
Posted by: James Barta | Oct 5, 2007 5:44:57 PM
So Jeff Merkley has spent $1295/day bringing in 11.80 unique contributions per day.
Meanwhile Steve Novick spent only $626/day while bringing in 7.8 unique contributions/day. For the dollars available to him, Novick has excited 36% more people to contribute per dollar spent. Details, details.
It’s easy to play with the numbers and that's using claims from either campaign’s website.
So in other words despite the support from Betway Senators for his competitor, Novick is bringing in the money and bringing in the people to make this a competitive race for Oregon Democrats. Voters will have a chance to weigh the two important conditions for this race. First, who will best represent Oregon's progressive values and second, who is most likely to prevail in a very tough campaign against a very rich Gordon Smith.
Posted by: salvador | Oct 5, 2007 6:03:53 PM
Actually, the opposite is often true. Your first quarter is when you hit up everybody you know, everyone you've helped along the way. After that it gets harder; you have to convince people.
My experience is that most of the money comes in late -- though I agree that the candidate's personal list is the most fertile source for money.
Convincing people isn't all that hard if folks believe that the candidate is speaking to their issues. We did public meeting in Bend this week where John knew 2 people in the room and half of the attendees wrote a check.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 6:12:47 PM
Well, when you say "late" you don't mean the 2nd or 3rd quarter out of 6 or 7, right?
Nobody but nobody thought Franken would come close to outraising Coleman, much less beat him by 200K. Comparing that singularly outstanding quarter, and expecting Mr. Merkley to raise anything like that is a little ridiculous.
That said, the best word to describe 294K in his situation would probably be "decent."
Posted by: James X. | Oct 5, 2007 6:13:06 PM
For some reason, James B.'s numbers left me a little confused about what I just read. If anyone else is as easily confused as I am, Merkley spent $110/contributor, while Novick spent $80/contributor. And as James B. said, Merkley had 12 new contributors/day, Novick had 8 new contributors/day. I'm not sure if that means something good or bad for anyone. Merkley's campaign spent less, but spent more per donor, but got more donors per day, but has fewer donors overall. Is that a more efficient or less efficient campaign? Same for Novick: Spent more, spent less per donor, got fewer donors per day, has more donors overall. Better? Worse? I'm confused again.
I should probably hit "back" at this point, but I'll hit "post" anyway.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 5, 2007 6:36:39 PM
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 6:12:47 PMComparing that singularly outstanding quarter...
Franken raised even more in the previous quarter. His current haul of $1.89 million is not "singularly outstanding".
I was not expecting Merkley to raise half of what Franken is, but we are talking less than 1/6th of that. Again, not slagging him off (particularly since Novick raised even less this quarter than Merkley) I am simply saying that this is not all that "descent" given what will be needed to defeat Smith (regardless of who gets the nomination).
So how do we in the netroots help turn that around?
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 5, 2007 6:44:19 PM
Posted by: James X. | Oct 5, 2007 6:13:06 PM
I believe James Barta was arguing that Merkley was spending more than a $109 per unique contributor gained vs. a little over $80 per unique contributor gained for Novick. Meaning that the cost/benefit per unique donor advantage is Novick's by a 26.8% margin (James Barta seems to have done the math wrong on the percentage difference).
Posted by: James Barta | Oct 5, 2007 6:52:19 PM
James X - I was a little annoyed with all the numbers being thrown around. (I'm sure the bulk of Novick's donations came after a particular day also.) So I came up with a crazy scheme resulting in Novick being 36% more efficient.
The point is in the last paragraph. With more people involved but with less out of state resources, Novick is beating expectations and giving a real race over who will be Oregon Democrats' best nominee. I for one don't want to see someone selected for a coronation.
Posted by: James X. | Oct 5, 2007 7:00:09 PM
Novick got a whole lot of online money right away when he announced. When Merkley announced, he didn't get as big of an immediate response online (though he apparently had a better overall first-quarter haul).
Hey, another way to slice it: Novick got $2.37 for every dollar spent, Merkley got $3.72 for every dollar spent.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 7:02:10 PM
"Franken raised even more in the previous quarter. His current haul of $1.89 million is not "singularly outstanding"."
Well, call it the same--1.89 vs 1.9. But I wasn't comparing Franken to Franken; I'm comparing Franken to the rest of the Democratic challengers in the US. Shit, I'm not sure any GOP INCUMBENTS pulled in that much last quarter (although it's certainly possible).
I think the money theorized as necessary for either man to beat Smith is rather overrated, but I can't imagine there's any doubt Mr. Merkley will have the higher campaign overhead, so his dollars will need to account for that.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 7:38:39 PM
"When Merkley announced, he didn't get as big of an immediate response online (though he apparently had a better overall first-quarter haul)."
They're saying they got 60K online. I think the Novick campaign is up to around 180K in a quarter and 2/3. Not sure if it's especially meaningful, but the question of who's got the "netroots" behind him seems to be easily answered at this point.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Oct 5, 2007 7:39:27 PM
While Novick and Merkley are the leading contenders to go against Smith it isn't so important that they are down around the $200K range at this time and not over a million like Al Franken. However, whoever wins will need to get lots more support for the challenge to unseat Smith. That's when we will see what the Democrats and progressives are made of.
Posted by: Patton Price | Oct 5, 2007 8:06:02 PM
torridjoe:
I think that your initial point is likely wrong--in the context of this race. For a less-expensive, less high-profile race, you could expect to have some of your best individual-donor success very early as you are calling your personal contacts (Sal's point stands, as well, though: the PAC money and a lot of contributions from partisan activists definitely come in late).
But I agree with Kari that you can't sprint your way to millions of dollars. I am sure that Novick has long-term fundraising plans that require cultivation of networks and so-forth, because he is smart and he has been on, or a key contact for, many big-time statewide campaigns (especially for a well-established "outsider").
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 5, 2007 9:32:16 PM
think that your initial point is likely wrong--in the context of this race. For a less-expensive, less high-profile race, you could expect to have some of your best individual-donor success very early as you are calling your personal contacts (Sal's point stands, as well, though: the PAC money and a lot of contributions from partisan activists definitely come in late).
Well, in context then, I think the more specific you get to this race, the more I would have expected a bigger surge. I say that for two reasons. First, this is so obviously a big target state for the Democrats, consensus top 5. For months there were only candidates saying no, and one guy who stepped up but didn't fit the "top tier" mold or the "what we're used to otherwise" mold, so money was lying in wait.
As soon as they got Jeff into the race though, and got the thumbs-up both from national and statewide bigwigs, particularly with the signaling endorsement from Ted and Ms. Roberts, that should have opened up the floodgates. I think to an extent Mitch is right--regardless of who the candidate is, combined they didn't even pull in 500K. What makes Minnesota so special that there's somehow $2mil ready to float in? OK, maybe Franken's a celebrity and leans on Hollywood. How about Mark Udall in CO; I think he did 1.5mil. Colorado's not even as far along on the red-blue spectrum as we are, for heaven's sake.
As I said, I think the money gap is less and less important as technology reduces the need for things like massive statewide broadcast ad buys (instead of targeted cable buys) and high priced commercials when solid digicam and editing skills can do it for a fraction of the price. But money is still a barometer of interest and excitement, and for a target state you gotta ask, where's the money? Are people hedging because the primary looks competitive, and nobody outside Oregon really could explain the difference between the two?
Posted by: verasoie | Oct 6, 2007 12:23:36 AM
Oregon is not a consensus top-5 race, it is definitely second tier.
The top tier races are NH, VA, CO, NM, (and possibly NE if Kerrey gets in) because all are blue or trending blue states with open races (except NE, which is red but still an open race and NH isn't an open race but might as well be).
Next comes OR with MN and ME, which are all winnable but will be real dogfights. We shouldn't expect OR to attract as much money as the top tier because those are much safer bets, nor for Merkley to match Franken who has national celebrity status and Hollywood/NY connections.
Merkley did well, not overwhelming, but well, and so has Novick given his outsider status. We should continue to hope that this race will not be marred with petty potshots between the two campaigns (pretty much all from Novick, truthfully) and that a spirited but fair and positive primary focused on what positive things the Democratic candidates can do for Oregon will excite voters to support a strengthened challenger to Smith.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 6, 2007 12:51:23 AM
"Oregon is not a consensus top-5 race, it is definitely second tier."
You may be right, but only as of Domenici's retirement, and pending a good candidate. So far one good one has opted out. But that would put it 6th, and until this point, both Cook and Cillizza have had them at 35 for a while.
Posted by: backbeat12 | Oct 6, 2007 2:19:53 AM
:lol:
:lol:
:lol:
Kari,
truly, you need to determine the mission of blue oregon.
:)
Posted by: backbeat12 | Oct 6, 2007 2:23:41 AM
We should continue to hope that this race will not be marred with petty potshots between the two campaigns (pretty much all from Novick, truthfully) and that a spirited but fair and positive primary focused on what positive things the Democratic candidates can do for Oregon will excite voters to support a strengthened challenger to Smith.
one word
Frohnmayer
This is not a typical two way race.
I've always voted Dem.
We're in deep doo doo.
Posted by: Daniel Spiro | Oct 6, 2007 7:39:20 AM
These numbers make a mockery of the pseudo-progressives who went onto this Website and talked smack against Novick and in favor of their boy Merkley as the "inevitable" candidate. From where I'm sitting, Merkley's showing hardly shows much support from Oregonians, given that he has still raised under $300,000 despite the fact that Chuck "The Anti-Democrat" Schumer is soliciting funds for him from across the nation.
If the Democrats want to go with the charisma-challenged Merkley as their version of the machine candidate, they will get crushed by Gordon Smith -- the guy who has the REAL war chest. If they want to beat Smith, they should go for the inspiring, non-traditional politician, Steve Novick. And they should insist that Merkley debate Novick early and often rather than hiding behind Schumer's skirt.
Come on Jeff. We need you to emerge from your Daddies in Washington and step onto those stages in Oregon ... with Novick. Make your respective cases directly to the people and let the press pick up on your tour. That way, you will both get the attention the Democrats need to win this race. That's our party's only chance.
Posted by: James X. | Oct 6, 2007 8:51:34 AM
Spiro, regardless of which candidate you're trying to get people to like, that's really unproductive language.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 6, 2007 10:28:55 AM
I wouldn't endorse the tone, but I don't think the argument is fundamentally invalid at all:
*many expected a better showing from the party-favored candidate
*many believe Mr. Merkley's particular style of governance and way of expressing himself is less-well suited to beating Smith than a non-traditional, take-no-shit style that Novick represents.
*I think even many Merkley supporters would be in favor of joint appearances, "debates,"--anything that allows the Democrats to speak with a united voice on why Smith needs to be replaced, while at the same time allowing party voters to make up their minds between two good candidates.
These are rational considerations, even if the method of delivery employed by Mr. Spiro is somewhat inflammatory.
Posted by: colin maloney | Oct 6, 2007 11:24:16 AM
Posted by: backbeat12 | Oct 6, 2007 2:23:41 AM
We should continue to hope that this race will not be marred with petty potshots between the two campaigns (pretty much all from Novick, truthfully)...
I don't think that the statement at the end there is entirely accurate. The "Novick has gone negative" meme is wholly without substance. It may be true that some who post as Novick supporters, may engage in "petty potshots," but there is a big difference between those on internet and the actual candidate and campaign. Let's not conflate the two.
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Oct 6, 2007 11:45:13 AM
anyone stop for a moment and think that Oregon Dems are underwhelmed at the idea of giving money to either candidate because they are both terrific? i think most Dems are inclined to be donating to a presidential candidate right now. once the primary is over, i think we'll see Dems start to dig deep to get rid of Smith. personally, i'd rather not spend much in the primary. let these guys do a lot of grassroots work, lots of debates & joint events, things that don't take a ton of money. the only reason i see for tv ads in the primary is to set the table for the general -- use the primary as a means to develop name recognition.
in fact, what i'd really love to see are commercials featuring both Novick & Merkley, telling people they're running for the nomination but the real opponent is Gordon Smith. name recognition for both, a non-stop attack on Gordo, and no negativity from the Dems.
Posted by: Sal Peralta | Oct 6, 2007 11:49:07 AM
It may be true that some who post as Novick supporters, may engage in "petty potshots," but there is a big difference between those on internet and the actual candidate and campaign.
There are plenty of pointless potshots being bandied about by supporters in both the Merkley and Novick camps. It'd be pretty easy to show that some of the folks who are paid advocates for the campaigns -- Kari, for example, with his rather bizarre "Phoney Frohnie" comment -- have crossed into the domain of taking petty potshots as members of the campaign.
Posted by: BeltwayBarker | Oct 6, 2007 11:51:12 AM
How much Merkley money came from outside of Oregon is the bigger question.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Oct 6, 2007 12:27:22 PM
>How much Merkley money came from outside of Oregon is the bigger question.
Well, thanks to the magic of computers and campaign finance legislation, we should be able to start figuring that out in a few weeks. I agree, it will be interesting. It will be even more interesting to see how much of it came in $1000 chunks or larger.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 6, 2007 1:11:01 PM
"How much Merkley money came from outside of Oregon is the bigger question."
I don't have a problem with outside money from individuals per se; certainly Steve has friends around the country, and many people in states without a hot race of their own are interested in helping get better Democrats into Congress.
The issue is not individual donors outside Oregon; to me it's institutional outside pressure to support one candidate over another that's bothersome.
Of course, if outside donations end up being the bulk of a candidate's support, that might be different. I doubt that would be true of either campaign at this stage, though.
Posted by: pat malach | Oct 6, 2007 2:51:50 PM
marred with petty potshots between the two campaigns (pretty much all from Novick, truthfully)
Trying to be civil here, but I think anyone who has been paying attention to what's gone on on these pages knows that thar is some pretty rank B.S. I say this as someone who was called and "asshole" and told to "shut the fuck up" when I tried to defend Novick during pirate-gate.
To call for civility and then lay down a stinker like the one above is pretty questionable. It certainly doesn't do much for your credibility when calling for civility. You really just marginalize your own opinion.
I can't imagine that was your goal.
Posted by: Big Barton | Oct 6, 2007 3:44:54 PM
I hope the campaign plan of at least one of Smith's challengers involves robbing a bank.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Oct 6, 2007 4:17:40 PM
>Make your respective cases directly to the people and let the press pick up on your tour. That way, you will both get the attention the Democrats need to win this race. That's our party's only chance.
I don't subscribe to the fear expressed in that final sentence, or to its melodramatic tone, nor should it be necessary for Merkley to subscribe to it in order to agree to some joint appearances. (I kept thinking, "Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi.")
But the rest is spot on. The press (especially the MSM) love conflict. Conflict is an engine that practically writes stories by themselves. If Jeff and Steve face off regularly around the state it will be great for both of them and especially great in a combined way for whichever of them ends up the nominee.
Posted by: Chuck Butcher | Oct 6, 2007 4:43:51 PM
While it is still early, time is passing and what Jeff and Steve need to do is make their cases for why they best represent Oregonians' interests. That certainly does not mean there is a reason for conflict - or negativity - it does mean that there are conflicting visions and they should be clear if voters are to make intelligent decisions. What ever emotions are driven by things like out of area money, endorsements, etc are just that, emotions, not rational judgments.
Supporters of either candidate engaging in heated rhetoric are forgetting that they will need each other for the Smith race...
Posted by: Jesse Cornett | Oct 6, 2007 5:05:21 PM
Anytime anyone here burps "Merkley" Novick's supporters scream bloody murder. I don't think you understand how much goodwill Kari has built up and how much of a disservice you're doing to your chosen candidate. Frankly, I'm surprised Steve hasn't spoken up to ask you to stop. It doesn't reflect well on him. And frankly because of it the chatter around the water cooler is that the Novick campaign has nothing left but anti-Merkley anger.
If you continue to relentlessly attack Kari - a person of great integrity who has done more than just about anyone to build the progressive netroots infastructure in Oregon - just understand that me and many others are prepared to defend him.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 6, 2007 5:20:54 PM
This really isn't true anymore, is it? You're also an official blogger for the campaign, having covered the kickoff for Merkley for Senate.
Sorry, I was checked out for about 24 hours - but I thought I'd respond to this.
I did do a bit of blogging over at JeffMerkley.com, but I'd say I spoke only for myself over there too. I didn't clear anything I wrote with anybody there (not that I wrote much, mostly posted photos.)
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 6, 2007 5:28:05 PM
Kari, truly, you need to determine the mission of blue oregon.
I haven't got the foggiest clue what this is a reference to, and I'd really rather stay focused on the topic, rather than yet another meta discussion. Our mission remains what it has always been.
Posted by: pat malach | Oct 6, 2007 5:32:05 PM
This week's episode of Jesse's Overly Melodramatic Theater brought to you by too much caffeine? I'm just guessin'
That was awesome, Jesse, Where'd ya get that speech, Magnificent Seven? I can see ya loadin' yer six shooters now.
Posted by: Pat Malach | Oct 6, 2007 5:37:29 PM
Personally, I think Kari should be very proud of what he's created with BlueOregon.
Posted by: James X. | Oct 6, 2007 7:18:06 PM
I'm not saying it was warranted -- I agree with TJ that it wasn't -- but if you go back and check who was using toward you the language you quoted, Pat, it was someone who has raised money for Novick and considers himself a Novick supporter. I could tell that without having to Google it, because there's basically one person around here who uses that sort of language. Like I noted over at Oregon Liberal, though, we should probably be trying to demonstrate that we're better behaved, rather than be trying to argue it.
Posted by: torridjoe | Oct 6, 2007 7:34:50 PM
"I don't think you understand"
Jesse, who is "you" in that post? And what examples of anti-Merkley anger are you citing? I've seen lots of anti-DSCC anger, some isolated patches of anti-Kari anger, and people who say they don't think Merkley is the better candidate of the two for one reason or another--but I'm hard pressed to think of someone displaying anti-Merkley anger. Ironically, I think the anger, if there is any, is being directed at people who are either in the employ of Mr. Merkley, or are working to support him. Mr. Merkley himself has been rather passive on the subject.
If you want anger, how about someone paid by the campaign calling Novick supporters "stark raving hypocrites?" I'm no hardass, that's ultimately forgivable--but you can't go off the rails like that and then say the atmosphere has been poisoned by someone else..!
Speaking of speaking for the campaign:
"I did do a bit of blogging over at JeffMerkley.com, but I'd say I spoke only for myself over there too."
Kari...come on, now. You took over for Carla while she was on vacation. Jeff may have been independent; you were on the team. You've spoken directly on behalf of the Merkley campaign, at the official site. That they trust you enough not to clear your text is surely gratifying, although it does suggest that they trusted you'd be reliably positive.
I believe you when you say you're not speaking for the campaign when you write at Blue Oregon. I suggested that maybe you make that clarification in your future disclaimers. Obviously you're under no Mandate (ha ha) to follow the suggestion.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 6, 2007 7:36:24 PM
Pat, I said "knock it off asshole" when you were attacking a lame op-ed by an Ashland Tiddings hack, by twice hurling the little gem of said op-ed being writen like "a desperate Merkely supporter" and "a sign of desperation by a Merkley supporter" on two seperate threads over on Loaded Orygun.
You were called what you called, not for "defending Novick" but for slagging off Merkley supporters hurling litlte turds like that. So can your bullshit "poor innocent me" schtick. You were throwing needless elbows and I called you on it by me, a Novick supporter.
Posted by: East Bank Thom | Oct 6, 2007 7:43:10 PM
because there's basically one person around here who uses that sort of language.
James, you're a well researched commenter, so just let me revise and extend the record. I know of a second person who has hurled the a**hole insult at the fairer sex, and it was one of the editors of this, "the biggest blog in Oregon."
Do we really want to go back and examine his netiquette?
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 6, 2007 7:48:39 PM
Oh come on TJ, let's be honest here, the screams of "sellout" marinated in piss and vinegar hurled by some Novick supporters when Tester endorsed Merekly, when Novick was previously lauding Tester in a Novick blogad does wreak of hypocrisy and/or sour grapes.
There have been numerous circular firing squad posts by Novick supporters and some drive-bys by some anti-Novick folks as well (though from anonymous or unfamiliar poster names).
Both camps (or rather their online boosters) have been guilty of tossing some turds at each others doorstep. Thankfully neither of the campaigns themselves have done anything resembling that.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 6, 2007 8:08:31 PM
Posted by: BeltwayBarker | Oct 6, 2007 11:51:12 AMHow much Merkley money came from outside of Oregon is the bigger question.
Is that a bigger question than how much money came from out-of-state for Gordon Smith?
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 5, 2007 4:10:51 PM
According to the Merkley press release:
So, that would be a $9230/day pace over 26 days. Details, details.