Kerry Heads for Boston on Funding High

[swag]

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373950456

. . .

Democrats head to Boston this weekend to prepare for their national convention poised to be the unlikely financial winners of this year's fundraising effort.

The unprecedented financial resources amassed to oust George W. Bush from office are in part a credit to Democratic challenger John Kerry's fund-raising prowess - but also to a less publicised group of multi-millionaires who have given huge sums to political groups seeking Mr Bush's defeat.

. . .

In addition, the latest figures from the Internal Revenue Service signal that the Democrats and their allies enjoy a meaningful financial lead over Mr Bush and his party, courtesy of a few big ticket donations to so-called 527 groups.

. . .

Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said: "We have never gone into the convention in the lead as a challenger. Never, ever. And we have clearly never gone in this well financed."

. . .

[Tempest]

1. Kerry also leads in direct contributions

But all the "liberal" media wants to talk about are indirect 527 contributions.

[swag]

2. Sorry, I would have included more detail on the Kerry contributions

but the 4 graph limit here stopped me.

Financial Times did go into it, though.

[Tempest]

3. Not your fault

The 527s were given top billing, and the article was written to make it look like the 527s were the reason Kerry is ahead in fundraising.


On Edit:

After reading the article, 527s were given the ONLY billing.

Nothing was said in the article about direct contributions to Kerry.

[Tempest]

4. After reading the article, direct contributions weren't mentioned at all

n/t

[swag]

5. I sit corrected

[2Design]

6. here is the statement on independent of the 527s

Independent of the 527 fund-raising, Mr Kerry and the Democrats have drummed up more financial support than Mr Bush and the Republicans this year: $292m for the Democrats, $272m for the Republicans. <snip>

it was at the bottom of the article