Well, thanks for notice of the study, but didn't everyone who has paid even slight attention to what was going on know this?

And yet he still has $40+ million in the bank, while she is $20+ million in debt. Funny how it works that you can spend more money when you raise more money.

All of the stories about spending should begin with a paragraph on earning.

And end with a paragraph on debt/cash flow.

Well, she had name recognition on her side, he had to introduce himself along with his platform early on. But since she THOUGHT she would have it wrapped up Feb 5 she just let him run but unfortunately for her he also was racking up the funds too.

Lesson learned, NEVER count your chickens before they are hatched.

Gee, maybe if Hillary had managed her money better she might have won.

And maybe if she had planned beyond Super Tuesday she would have won.

And maybe if she didn't surround herself with the likes of Mark Penn she would have won.

She didn't win. She ran a crappy campaign and made all the wrong moves. For all intents and purposes this nomination battle has been over since Super Tuesday. All that Hillary has done since then is hurt the Democratic party.

It's moneyism!

This is really, really infuriating. If the supers would have stepped in in February when it was over, the tens of millions of dollars wasted could have been better spent going after republicans. What a waste of time, money and effort.

Also, if they would have stepped in the clintons wouldn't have been able to smear, demean and attack obama as much as they did and there would not have been this massive division in the party. People would have come together over the last 3 months and we would be going after mcbush.

An outrageous tragedy. Thanks clintons and thanks supers.

So he managed his campaign very tactically, spent money in big amounts when it was important to do so, and still has money in the bank.

Clinton has gone broke. So did McCain. Tell me how "experience" is so much more important than judgment again?

Yes, money is exactly why Obama won the race.

It's has nothing to do with the fact that Obama had more support among the nation and ran a smarter campaign. Maybe that enabled him to run more ads you know.

Or maybe it was because Clinton was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign. Keep thinking of excuses for your candidate TPM.

Does anyone know current percentages regarding tomorrow's primaries?

You mean how he was able to compete fairly against someone who enjoyed a HUGE advantage in name recognition and the advantage of a former president campaigning full time on her behalf for the entire campaign?

Ads are all about information, and Hillary had a huge advantage. Obama didn't get an edge on her through outspending her, he just cut into her huge advantage.

This scapegoating media expenditures is straight out of Hillary's excuse book. Don't play that game. She had EVERY advantage from the very beginning.

Aahh, this is the Eric we all knew. Welcome back, Eric.

"Study: Obama Dramatically Outspent Hillary On TV Ads During Campaign...

Hmm... now why would that be...? no no... let me think... oh yeah!

...to overcome the huge - mega - unbelievable N-A-M-E R-E-C-O-G-N-I-T-I-O-N of his opponent, who just happened to be the wife of a two-term fairly successful President.

Hence, "Obama Dramatically Outspent Hillary On TV Ads During Campaign" = whopper non-story... IMVHO.

Hey! when are you guys gonna start looking into the flawed Nov. 08 election voting systems and Rove's State apparatus already/still in place?

What I think is particularly interesting is this comment by the Clinton’s that “a anti-war group" (the MoveOn.org group) is investing in Obama?

As if the Clintons are really saying, “those nasty LIBERAL morons” in a sort of redux of Karl Rove, want to END the war? Imagine the gall of those MoveOn.org people!

Takes you back to where Bill Clinton insisted that “those 16 words were just a mistake” when talking about Niger and yellowcake that Bush used in his State of the Union speech. And of course that caused a series of post later on by Kevin Drum over at Washington Monthly to insisting that Dems running for Prez REALLY would NOT get out of the war in Iraq, as if somehow, Kevin had access to inside the loop, where the rest of us don’t need access too. This bohemian concept that as a matter of existence, we stupid Americans need to understand that being outright LIED to by highest office in the land is something Americans need to learn to accept as a matter of everyday life, a certain fact in issue that nobody can do anything about.

The war in Iraq has NOT now or every will take a backseat to the economy, health insurance or anything else. So Hillary lost the campaign the minute she thought Americans were used to being lied too and would therefore simply sit back and accept it.

As if the Clintons are really saying, “those nasty LIBERAL morons” in a sort of redux of Karl Rove, want to END the war? Imagine the gall of those MoveOn.org people!

This isn't the first time.

She went after MoveOn before this. Right after the boilermakers and gun-lovin' - next thing you heard, she was going off on Democratic activists.

And she stood there and said she'd run a progressive administration.

what a big fat lie that was.

In addition to all the excellent points made by everyone else on this and other threads, here's this:

The Clintons, count them, 3, have been camped out permanently in the primary states nearly on a 24/7 basis. THREE well known, well recognized, still well liked by low info voters, people campaigning is not equal to a few minutes of advertisements?

Obama has a young family, requiring either or both of the parents' attention nearly constantly, so he does not have the same face time, he has to substitute with ads...

Their disingenuosity :-) on this "spending" by the Obama campaign is just plain crazy.

My post was in regard to the undeclared senators wanting to give Hillary moretime before they declare.

Senator Obama had to take on the Ultra famous Bill Clinton and his Eva Peron. That was a daunting task, for someone very well known, let alone a first term Senator from Illinois with little name recognition, an African American, and with an uncommon name.

Look at how poorly the very well known Dodd, Biden, Richardson, and Edwards fared.

Of course he had to spend heavily to introduce himself to the entire country.

What people are missing about the whole story is:
The massive amount of ordinary people who donated to, and volunteered to help Senator Obama. That is the real story that is getting lost in all this spending comparisons reports.

Why did all those people do so. I think that it was not just that Senator Obama was a messenger for change, but also that many Democrats were very resistant, from the very start, to the idea of eight more years of the Clintons in the White House.

It is very clear that a very large share of progressive and moderate Democrats were never on board with the notion of nominating Senator Clinton. So just start there. It shows that she was already a divisive figure, long before Senator Obama caught fire. Many Democrats were hungry for an alternative to the Clintons. They discovered that Senator Obama best matched what they were looking for, and so they showered him with their donations in order to make sure that he was well armed to do battle with The Clintons, The Great and Famous Clintons, The All Powerful Clintons, The Vast Establishment Clintons.

If there were no great hunger among Democrats to end the Clinton era, then Senator Obama's message would have fallen on deaf ears. Senator Obama and the money that was donated to his campaign are absolute proof that for many Democrats, Hillary was never an acceptable choice. That is the real story behind the money he raised.

Hate to be a contrarian, but I just made my LAST Obama campaign contribution....

....and I won't spend another dime on Obama until I hear officially that Clinton is no longer in contention for the VP slot. There's no way that I will put any of my money into backing Hillary Clinton in any way, shape, or form.

Once she's out, and for good, then the checks start rolling again.

Yeah, Whitey just keeps giving them their money.

dumb dumb whitey!!

Hahahahahahah

Yowzer, 23% of the $127,132,000 spent over the course of the campaign went to Iowa and New Hampshire alone. And that's not even counting the candidates that dropped out, or the Republicans. No wonder Michigan wants so badly to get a piece of the early voting... that's a sizable chunk of the advertising dollars pie that's being taken before anyone else gets a bite.

Outspending her and still getting his ass handed to him in the late primaries. Wow.

Right now according to RealClearPolitics:

Popular Vote (w/MI)
Obama: 17,389,253 47.3%
Clinton: 17,692,976 48.1%
Clinton +303,723 +0.8%

Estimate w/IA, NV, ME, WA*
Obama: 17,723,337 47.4%
Clinton: 17,916,838 47.9%
Clinton +193,501 +0.5%

Clinton leads....at a fraction of the cost per vote.

Obama is trying to buy the nomination.

Go Hillary.

Jeebus, The Democratic Party is beginning to look like a complete bust. Obama is completely off the front page now - a bad place to be and Obama is creative enough to put himself back on front burners - he is too busy leaving his church.

Hillary people HATE Obama - Obama people won't criticize Hillary for appearing too sexist so they do NOTHING AT ALL (as if nothing at all is a plan - how Bush like of Obama is that?).

Ralph Nader is probably never going to have a better year than now.

AND McCain will win by default - so maybe Dems should just focus on winning the Senate and house by veto proof majorities. It's all the Dems have left. Lets concentrate on removing Elisabeth Dole and Mitch McConnell out of office since that is all the Dem Party seems to able to agree on.

We'll have four more years of a Repug Prez McCain vetoing EVERYTHING - and no reason to care because Dems could have a with a veto proof majority.

And Maybe if McCain makes his VP Huckabee - Huckabee WON'T veto everything should McCain suddenly drop dead of old age. It would still be a win, win for the ever stupid Democratic Party.

We used to call that "buying an election".

If she was a man the MSM would have branded her as some sort of delusional freakish cult figure-borderline dangerous