Small Donor Presidential Campaign Contributions, 1999-2007

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 11:46

1. Bush 2004: $87.0M (approximate, individual contributions multiplied by percentage of donations from those who gave les than $200)
   
2. Kerry 2004: $70.4M (approxoimate)
   
3. Bradley 2000: $34.86M (I have a hard time believing this, but it is the figure Open Secrets reports, and it is backed up by the FEC).
   
4. Dean 2004: $31.3M (approxoimate)
   
5. Bush 2000: $20.26M (source)
   
6. Obama 2008: $16.39M (source)
   
7. Gore 2000: $13.32M (source)
   
8. Buchanan 2000: $8.65M (source)
   
9. McCain 2000: $9M (approximate, derived by multiplying McCain's total 2000 donations by 30%, as per this article, and then rounding up)
   
10. Kucinich 2004: $5.8M (approxoimate)
    
11. Nader 2000: $5.74M (source)
    
12. Clark 2004: $5.6M (approxoimate)
    
13. Edwards 2008: $5.33M (source)
    
14. McCain 2008: $4.03M (source)
    
15. Clinton 2008: $3.97M (source)
    
16. Romney 2008: $3.10M (source)
    
17. Edwards 2004: $2.9M (approxoimate)
    

Apart from Bradley's and McCain's 2000 numbers, which I can't absolutely verify, these numbers are accurate. Here are some thoughts on these numbers:

• Bush's large small donor base in 2000 and 2004 demonstrates that there is a large pool of small donors for conservatives that the current field of Republican candidates clearly is not activating. The conservative grassroots are not donating at anywhere near their recent rates.
  
• As large as Obama's current small donor base is, there is no guarantee he will surpass Dean's totals. Right now, he is about half way there. He will probably pass Dean, but with the earlier primary calendar, he also might not have enough time to do so.
  
• If Bradley really did raise over nearly $35,000,000 from small donors, then the role his campaign played in the new small donor explosion for Democrats is woefully unexplored. Also, it shows that Gore probably would have been able to surpass Bush in 2000 donations had he turned down public financing for the primaries.
  
• Third-party candidacies thrived on small donations in 2000, as both Buchanan and Nader put up large totals. Again, along with McCain and Bradley campaigns that year, both showed the potential for the huge small donor totals in the 2004 campaign. In fact, it was more than just potential, as the small donations were already being made in large amounts. Small donors contributed nearly $100,000,000 to the 2000 presidential campaign, fully half of the totals in 2004! "Revolutions" seem to happen before they are recognized.

It is tempting to think that the latest small donor craze is the signal of a major paradigm shift. However, I think these numbers show that the recent increase in small donors is by no means a major shift, but rather simply an increase in an already extent trend. Right now, one of the defining aspects of this trend is that Democrats continue to expand their small donor base, with Republicans are seeing their small donor base dry up. That is a very healthy sign, and once again points to the tremendous potential of the Democratic nominee in 2008.