D.D. 10/17/05

Ed Bryant and Van Hilleary supporters continue to be at each other's throats after the latest campaign disclosures. Van Hilleary's talking point is that he has raised more money than Ed and has a higher overall name recognition than Ed, and even leads preliminary polling over Ed. Ed's talking point is that he has beat Van's fundraising among money that can be used in the primary, has more individual contributors than Van, and is leading Van among primary voters in the most recent poll. So which is it?

First of all, there is something worth considering in the Zogby poll that Bryant touts. The poll measures a potential general election matchup between both Van and Ed against Harold Ford, Jr. the assumed Democratic nominee. However, the poll does not measure the matchup of the primary- between Van and Ed. That may be trivial at this point though- Ed's talking point is that he is in a better position to defeat Ford, and that's exactly what the Zogby poll measures.

Something that also might be worth noting in all of the polling data, there is the possibility of error in weighing. For instance, if voters in East Tennessee normally contribute X% to the total-state wide turnout, either the number of respondents or the data from respondents in East Tennessee should be weighted by X%. This is exactly the way that both Hilleary and Bryant can claim to be leading and both polls can still be "scientifically accurate." Van's poll appears to have been weighted- 48%-39%-22% (East-Middle-West), based on these graphs. It would be interesting to see how Ed's poll was weighted- so we could determine which poll was weighed more correctly. As you might imagine, weighing can tilt the poll in one direction or the other- depending, in this case on where the candidate's base of support is. If Ed's poll weighs West Tennessee higher than it's contribution to total turnout, his polling numbers could be inflated- and the same goes for Van Hilleary and East Tennessee.

That aside, the next fight seems to be over who has more money. Ed's campaign is right that Van cannot spend some of the money he's raised in the primary election. How does that happen? The only way a campaign starts raising money for a general election concurrent with a primary is if the candidate takes more donations from donors over the individual contribution limit per cycle. So when Bryant says that 19% of Van's contributions in the second quarter cannot be used in the primary election- that means that 19% of Van's contributions from the second quarter were donations from donors who have already given the primary cycle max.

Does that mean that Van can't use that money as Bryant says? Strictly speaking, no. Van can use every cent in his bank account, including those cents alloted for a general election in the primary- as an interest free loan. However, if Van were to do that and lose the primary, he would have find a way to pay back all the contributors who went over the cycle limit- and that could be grueling. Who wants to donate to someone who lost the primary and isn't actively running for anything else? Of course payback could also come in the form of a personal check. If Van were to win the primary, though- he could easily pay off his ledger debt from money from large PACs and other individual donors bound to flow in to any Republican who wins the primary. Having general election cash on hand in the primary isn't a bad thing- you can loan it to yourself.