Senator Barack Obama continued his record setting fund raising, reporting contributions of $51 million in July. Obama raised almost two times the amount raised by McCain, who reported $27 million in contributions. From the Washington Post:
Based on the figures the Obama campaign made public yesterday, the senator from Illinois has now raised about $400 million in his campaign for the White House, and his top aides believe funds could come in at an even faster rate when voters are paying closer attention to the contest in September and October. McCain’s campaign announced Friday that the senator from Arizona raised $27 million in July, bringing his total to just over $170 million for the campaign to date.
The fundraising success has spilled over to Democrats in general.
And Obama’s strong financial position has been accompanied by a broader wave of support for Democrats in other federal, state and local campaigns. On Friday, the Federal Election Commission released a review of party fundraising over the past 18 months that found Democratic Party committees have raised 25 percent more during this election cycle than at the same point four years ago. Republicans, by contrast, have seen a 12 percent decline.
Obama is on course to raise over a half billion dollars in contributions, a stunning number. But despite that the fundraising news for Republicans is not all bad.
The trend lines for Republicans are not all bad. The Republican National Committee reported yesterday it had $75 million in the bank at the end of July, less than four years ago but substantially more than the $28.5 million that the Democratic National Committee had in the bank at the end of last month. The DNC released numbers yesterday showing the party raised $27.7 million in July.
Republican officials point out that, when the RNC totals are combined with the $21 million in cash that McCain held at the end of July, they actually have slightly more money available for the White House contest than do Democrats. (Combined figures show Republicans with $96 million and Democrats with $94.3.)
Obama, whatever the final outcome, will not be wanting for funds coming down the stretch. It is financial parity, which is new ground for Democrats.
Bill Manzi.com 
Your Honor,
Imbalance in funds doesn’t not show up in a corresponding disparity in pols. They are nearly equal.
How can that be????
Jules
LikeLike
Because it is going to be a close race. But that money advantage could weigh heavily coming down the stretch.
LikeLike
Your Honor,
I do agree that the extra cash may affect marginal voters for a victory.
To do so will result viscoius ads. Soros will see to that.
Jules
LikeLike
Your Honor,
Off subject.
In the question “why won’t Obama take on McCain in an unstructured, open forum, I saw and heard the answer.
In the Christian forum he went to, he was asked when did life begin. He stuttered and mumbled his way to not answering the question, and ended with “that it is above his pay grade”.
McCain answer was simply at the inception.
Without get into the arguments of abortion or right to life issues why didn’t he simply say “at birth”?
I don’t believe he will do well against McCain in an off the cuff discussion.
You can see the responses on “You Tube”
Jules
LikeLike
I was interested in but unable to watch that forum. The reports seem to indicate that some portions were not Obama’s finest hour. The WSJ Ed page scored him pretty heavily on his Clarence Thomas answer. I still feel Obama ought to debate this guy as much as possible, not withstanding any flaws in performance at that forum.
I do not recall that he had any real problems in the Hillary debates. I know that they were not town hall style, but he still seemed to do ok. Do you agree with that assesment?
LikeLike
Your Honor,
What is WSJ ED?
Then I will comment.
Jules
LikeLike
Wall Street Journal.
LikeLike