WHATEVER THEY SAY, IT'S THE MONEY!

After all is said and almost done, the numbers that are dragging Hillary Clinton to the end of her campaign are not delegate counts but dollar amounts. She is already more than $20 million in debt, and her campaign is costing something like $1 million a day.

No matter how gritty our girl is, she can't keep this up forever. The big donors she counted on when folks talked about the illusory "well-oiled Clinton money machine" have mostly dropped by the wayside, either having given all they could under new restrictive fundraising rules, or because they were disgusted with the meanness and old-fashioned incompetence of the Clinton campaign.

So one way the long Democratic contest could end is for Barack Obama to agree to pay off part of Clinton's debts -- the $10 million she owes to vendors -- in return for her withdrawal and "enthusiastic" support. But that's another old-fashioned tactic, and the Obama campaign has prevailed this last year and a half by understanding the difference between the old and the new.

(1) Proportional distribution of delegates in primaries and caucuses meant that old big-state strategies would not work the way they did when winner-take-all primaries gave candidates a chance to win more than 300 delegates in California and almost as many in New York;

(2) The old big-donor strategy of the Clinton campaign would not work over a long run because eventually any candidate runs out of big donors and their friends, as opposed to a more elastic small-donor Internet strategy -- and Obama used the Net to find an almost endless supply of $20 or $50 supporters.

So, although Clinton started out far ahead in the money race, Obama eventually was able to outspend her 2-to-1 in the most recent primaries -- and he still has a campaign bank account of $42 million and growing.

Although Clinton did win the big states -- essentially conceding small ones to Obama's incredible door-to-door organization -- those victories produced narrow delegate victories because new Democratic Party rules made each primary a collection of district or county elections, with delegates allotted in proportion to the roughly 55-45 vote distribution in most areas.

In fact, although Clinton won Texas, Obama actually won more delegates there. Energywise, Clinton was the bunny with the little drum, but it was Barack who was slowly and steadily building up his delegate total almost one-by-one.

Now Clinton owes telephone companies, printers, button-makers and all the other small creditors following campaigns the $10 million mentioned above -- and that figure is growing. Because television commercial-makers and stations get their money up-front, the Clintons have had to lend themselves almost $12 million.

Going back to the old days -- which could have been Hillary's slogan -- party-winning campaigns sometimes absorbed the people and money of their opponents. It's a nice unifying gesture -- keep peace in the family -- but Obama can hardly go to his Internet army and ask for more money so he can give it to the Clintons. (Vendors, maybe, but the Clintons themselves, never.)

There is another big reason for the winner choosing not to graciously help this set of losers. The Obama people distrust the Clintons, suspecting that no matter what she promises, Hillary will be hoping that Obama loses in November. Her one final chance to become president will come in 2012, but that chance depends on Obama losing this November, allowing Clinton to try one more time in four years.

That's the old-fashioned way, too: Ronald Reagan won the Republican nomination and the presidency in 1980 after Gerald Ford lost the 1976 election to Jimmy Carter -- partly because, more often than not, Reagan suddenly became too busy to help out his party's nominee. Ah, politics!

On to November. Obama is already actively organizing for the general election in almost every state, large and small. He has the money and people to do that. The assumed Republican candidate does not. John McCain raised a total of $77 million through March, compared with Clinton's $189 million and Obama's $231 million by that point -- almost all of that in donations of $200 and less.

The bottom line is that Obama is where he is because of Change We Can Believe In. With the help of the Internet and the tireless force of young people who understand this new world, he has changed the way candidates run and win campaigns. Believe it!

Thank you Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos.

Benefits of Operation Chaos:

1. Destroys the Obamassiah media myth spun about Obama and significantly damages him politically with the “Moderate” voters thus giving McCain and the GOP at least a slim chance in the Nov elections.

2. Kills Clinton Inc politically with average Democrats. Now just about everyone loathes them, not just Conservatives.

3. Puts a serious, serious, hurt on the Clinton’s ill gotten bank roll while simultaneously significantly reducing both Bill and Hillary's future marketability

4. Gives the raving lunatic fringe commentators in the Junk Media a fatal case of influence envy

5. Drives the Hysteric Left even more hysteric

Its only money, honey. Send Bill out for a few weeks of speeches like those that brought in most of the $109 million you’ve chalked up since leaving the WH.

Besides, since politics is your business, shouldn’t your contributions be deductible?

Reeves is right about Hillary but wrong about B.O. Money alone won’t do it - if so he would have won Pennsylvania and Ohio. Yet, he may win in November, and if he does, there will soon set in the biggest case of buyers’ remorse in history.

I foresee the next Presidential term as a crashing failure, a one-term affair, after which the incumbent joins Jimmy Carter in building houses for the poor and in pernicious meddling.

Now Clinton owes telephone companies, printers, button-makers and all the other small creditors following campaigns the $10 million mentioned above.

Any small business who is dumb enough to provide products or services ANY political campaign without cash on the barrel head deserves to get stiffed. It's one thing if you own a business and want to make a donation to a candidate. But otherwise, all I can say is that a fool and his money were lucky enough to get together in the first place.

I foresee the next Presidential term as a crashing failure, a one-term affair, after which the incumbent joins Jimmy Carter in building houses for the poor and in pernicious meddling.

So true, and it applies to McCain as well as Obama. I'll place a mark beside McCain's name only because being bitten by a copperhead isn't usually as bad as being bitten by a cottonmouth.

If I was an Obama donor I'd be pretty upset to hear that my money was being used to bail out the Beast. I'll bet this doesn't happen. The Clintons will be on their own here.

"I foresee the next Presidential term as a crashing failure..."

I agree completely, but only if you mean regardless of which major party candidate is elected. McCain and Obama will BOTH be presidents who will make people long for the good old days of Jimmy Carter's presidency IMO.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.