Why Obama Reaps Contributions from Donors of Former Rivals

Ever since John Edwards dropped out of the Democratic presidential primary at the end of January 2008, the media has focused public attention towards the tallying of how many superdelegates and primary votes Obama and Clinton are each getting in their head-to-head race. The LA Times printed an article today addressing why there has been little public competition between Obama and Clinton for the campaign donors of their former rivals.

Although Obama receives endorsement from Richardson and Sen. Chris Dodd while Edwards and Biden remain neutral, there must be a greater underlying factor as to why these ‘dropped-candidate’ Democrats are notably favoring Obama. LA Times writer Dan Morain interprets that Obama's $2 million over Clinton’s $900,000, collected in only two months of February and March, suggests that “Many Democrats take an ‘Anybody but Clinton’ view. Morain quotes San Jose State University political scientist Larry N. Gerston, who said, “[Clinton] is the establishment candidate...[these donors are] saying 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend.' By going with Obama, they are perpetuating the possibility that it is ABC -- anybody but Clinton."

The Times’ data was collected and evaluated before Obama stumbled by making remarks that political critics have labeled elitist, and also before Obama’s embarrassment with his former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. Nevertheless, the finger pointing, by both Obama and Clinton campaigns, by the media, and by the American people following the Presidential primary election, of which candidate is the establishment candidate, started in the beginning of the election and continues. If the media keeps focusing their attention on who has the best chance of winning in the democratic primary, then the average American is bound to get caught up in the media-produced hype.

How was this "Anybody But Clinton" sentiment created? Past Presidential elections and the current election demonstrates that the media promotes establishment candidates who represent big businesses. In the beginning of the primaries, when Clinton was portrayed by the media as a well-funded candidate with various resources, various factors led Americans to close the gap between support for Obama and Clinton. Perhaps American voters just don’t like to be told by the media, or any political institution, of how they are going to vote. Also, it is quite possible that the media incentive to promote the establishment candidate causes ‘dropped-candidate’ Democrats to donate large sums of money to Obama. The result that is created sends a big message from American Presidential campaign donors not only to the FEC, but also to election followers all over the United States.