As Matt Singer reported earlier, Barack Obama has astounded everyone with his unheard of take in the second quarter. The numbers are staggering. $32.5 million dollars raised in three months. He handily beat Hillary Clinton ($27 million), and positively crushed John Edwards ($9 million). The number of people donating to his campaign is unprecedented at such an early stage of a race. 258,000 added to his coffers. Most importantly, Obama has allocated aside the vast majority of his war-chest for the primary election. $31 million of this quarter's take will be available to use on ads effective immediately.

So what is Obama doing with all the cash? Well, if you live in Iowa, chances are you've seen the following ad. The key for Obama, like Mitt Romney on the GOP side, is to introduce himself to the American public. When you rake in these kinds of totals, that task is much, much easier.

Mark your calendars. February 5, 2008 is shaping up to be the day that will decide who will win the nomination for president. Following the lead of California and New Jersey, New York has decided to push up the date of its primary to coincide with what one purple dinosaur is calling "Superdee-Duperdee Tuesday!" A dozen other states are also keen to get in on the action. If you wondered whether the candidates would have trouble spending all that money they raised in the first quarter, now you have your answer. Jet fuel ain't cheap, and there's going to be a lot of it used in that first week of Feb.

CNN seems to think that New York's move will benefit Clinton and Giuliani, seeing as those two call the Empire State home. To my mind it's a bit too early to make such pronouncements. Given the momentum shifts of campaigns, we really don't know where Hillary or Rudy will stand in the public eye some ten months from now. The condensed schedule will, however, almost certainly herald a greater reliance on YouTube, website traffic, and virtual "gatherings." You can't be in 15 states at once, after all. But maybe the candidates don't mind so much. Front-loading the primaries means fewer doors to knock on, coffee shops to visit, and hands to have to shake in order to nail down that party nomination.

So what do you think? Is it a good idea to get the whole nominating process over with in one fail swoop, or did we have it right the first time?

We have come a long, long way since the invention of the telegraph. In today's day and age, information travels faster than it has ever traveled before and the impact of this on politics has been tremendous. But is this entirely a good thing?

As a result of the expedition of the dissemination of news to the public, politicians have seen their campaigns accelerated and this has led to a number of states attempting to move their primaries up. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing remains a point of debate. As Yahoo News points out, in Michigan, the State Senate has approved a measure to move the state's presidential primary nominations to January 15. However, this is not a "done deal" as of yet.

"Republicans control the state Senate, Democrats the House, so changes in the measure are likely. State Democratic Chairman Mark Brewer said the Senate bill contains language that doesn't comply with national party rules and therefore is unacceptable."

The best article I've seen so far on the effects (intentional and unintentional) of the front-loaded 2008 presidential primary schedule is up this morning at USA Today - As states play 'Me First,' primaries fall into chaos, by Susan Page. With so many states moving their primary dates earlier in the 2008 calender, we are faced with the fact that we might know both major party presidential candidates by the middle of February. That does a couple of things probably not foreseen by the architects of the early primaries, including the elimination of public financing of presidential campaigns. That's because candidates who accept public financing must legally wait until their party's convention is held to nominate them before they can receive and spend campaign funds. Candidates in this day and age are not going to wait, essentially from February to the end of August, to campaign against the other party and its presumptive nominee. They can spend primary money during that time, but legally that's set aside to spend only against opponents from the same party running for the nomination. The result: no public financing next year.

While the parties have attempted to corral the 2008 primary process, that's creating a mess as well. Right now it looks as if one of the most populous and important electoral states, Florida, might not even have any delegates allowed at the Democratic convention in Denver. The DNC will also be forced to deny delegates to Michigan (home of Detroit) if that state approves a measure to move its primary to January 15. Strangely, the party could then reverse itself at the convention, where the party and the candidates vote on the rules of the convention and the party platform for the election. It's possible that a good part of convention week could be spent arguing on whether or not to seat several hundred delegates from important Democratic states. But that would only be after months of Democrats accusing other Democrats of "disenfranchisement".

More importantly, this mess of a primary season has the potential to produce a serious case of "buyer's remorse".

When assessing polling results early in the primary season, sometimes results can be seen as suspect because the national electorate hasn't yet gotten to "know" all of the candidates. That's because some political figures in each party already are recognized nationally, and others might be recognizable in a particular state or region, but have yet to make a national name for him or herself.

That's why polling firms often ask people if 1) they recognize a name, and 2) they have enough information about that person to evaluate him or her as a candidate. This can give an idea of the potential upside of one candidate against another. If a Candidate A has a huge national name recognition and polls well against a Candidate B that doesn't have the same approximate level of national name ID, it follows that as Candidate B gets better known nationally, he or she might do better in future polls against Candidate A.

Gallup has an article up on what they call the "Name ID" statistics of both the Democratic and Republican primary candidates. It shows that the leaders on the Democrats' side all are known enough nationally for voters to form opinions about them. That's good for Hillary Clinton. She won't have to deal with someone coming out of the blue at her.

It's a bit different on the Republican side, however.

The St. Petersburg Times is running a story today (Dems' primary may not count) on some odd developments in the Democrats' Florida Primary, to be held January 29th, 2008. It has nothing to do about problems with the candidates, vote counts, hanging chads, or even Katherine Harris. By moving up their primaries to an earlier date, Florida lawmakers have created a situation where it looks as if the Florida delegates at the National Democrat Convention won't be bound to vote for the candidates based on votes cast during the primary.

On Jan. 29, Florida Republicans and Democrats head to the polls to pick presidential nominees. Republican votes count, just as you would expect, but the results for Democrats would be nonbinding. No delegates would be awarded based upon the results and instead party activists and insiders would decide on some later date how to divvy up the state's more than 200 delegates to the Democratic national convention.

Yea, that's a great idea. Have the insiders divide up the delegates. Wonder how much that's worth? More importantly, why bother having a primary at all?

Howard Dean and the DNC aren't the only ones upset about early primaries. The GOP is preparing to also sanction the states that elect to move their primaries to earlier dates contrary to the party's clearly defined directives, according to the Palm Beach Post:

"The rules that were adopted at the convention in 2004 are clear and will be applied equally to every state," said Amber Wilkerson, a Republican National Committee spokeswoman. Under committee rules, the state parties must file a report by Sept. 4 detailing when and how convention delegates will be selected. The committee will publish a "Call to the Convention" before the end of the year detailing how many delegates each state will receive. States that inform the party before the "Call to the Convention" that they plan to hold their primaries before Feb. 5 or after July 28 would lose half their GOP delegates; states that make the indication later would lose 90 percent of their delegates.

That means that the GOP will also move to punish other early states, including Wyoming, which just moved its primary to January 5, 2008. That makes it the winner in the "who's first" primary sweepstakes for the time being.

But Ryan Sager writes in The New York Sun that GOP officials still believe that regardless of any possible sanctions (i.e. removal of half of the GOP delegates), Florida's primary on January 28, 2008 will still be the "make or break" contest for Republicans. The winner of that (now looking like Rudy Giuliani) will carry the momentum and advantage of winning a large cosmopolitan state into the primaries on Super Tuesday (February 5).

By the way, the latest primary schedule can be found here to the left of Susan Page's article on the chaos of the 2008 primary season. It's current as of 8/30/07 at 5:02pm. But I'm already hearing rumors that earlier today Michigan's House just voted to move it's primary up to the middle of January! Sheesh....

Since last year a number of states have been pushing for earlier primary dates for the 2008 race. Today California is one signature away from making it happen. The legislature has OK'd a plan to bump its primary from June all the way back to February 5. The proposal will become a reality if, as expected, Gov. Schwarzenegger approves it.

Such a move would bring candidates to California early and often and steal some attention away from early-voting states:

Legislative leaders say an earlier primary will give California some influence in selecting the next president and force candidates to address issues such as immigration that don't resonate in Iowa and New Hampshire, where voting will take place in January.

It's hardly an original idea. Illinois, Texas, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Kansas and New Jersey are all considering similar plans to move their primaries back to February. If it happens, it could alter the landscape of the entire presidential race, and make 2008 a very long year for candidates and voters.

3/15 Update: California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signs a bill moving up California's presidential primary.

In a move that would alter the presidential nomination process, California and Florida are angling for earlier primary dates for the 2008 race. The idea is to force candidates to campaign in their states and steal some of the thunder from early-voting locales like New Hampshire and Iowa.

Such a change would transform the nomination battles in both parties, forcing candidates to compete in some of the country's priciest media markets while diverting their attention from the chicken-dinner circuit in Davenport, Manchester and other small towns and cities where old-style retail politics is king.

Well-funded front-runners on both sides - such as Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) - would likely benefit, while lesser-known contenders with slimmer bank accounts would find their tasks even more daunting.

For instance, California usually holds its primary in June, long after the major candidates have gotten momentum in other states. Now the Golden State wants to move the primary as early as February. It could be an uphill battle, since both parties usually resist such change.

If you're a political junkie with an interest in the nuts-and-bolts of the primary process, check out the full LATimes story.

Well, the DNC is playing hardball. As threatened, the Democratic National Committee has voted to strip Florida of all of its delegates to the Democratic convention in 2008. This is in retaliation for Florida scheduling its Democratic presidential primary early, on January 29, 2008. Originally, Howard Dean had threatened to take away any delegates that were won by candidates campaigning in Florida after they announced the move-up of their primary, but everyone ignored him. This decision makes things simpler by invalidating all future delegates.

The DNC's rules and bylaws committee, which enforces party rules, voted yesterday morning to strip Florida of all its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver -- the harshest penalty at its disposal.

There is an automatic 30 day stay on this decision, giving Florida time to switch its primary date to a later one. Right now it's a game of chicken. Who will blink first, Howard Dean and the DNC or the Florida Democrats? In a sign of how acrimonious this fight could get, Florida Democrats are invoking the visage of the 2000 Recount, and blaming the Republicans, of course:

They blamed the Republicans who control the Florida Legislature and invoked the biggest bogeyman of all: the 2000 presidential recount. ''We're going to fight to have Florida Democratic votes counted,'' said U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, the state's top Democrat. ``It's always been a top priority for the Democratic National Committee to protect the rights of every eligible American to vote, and we hope the DNC is going to continue to honor this right.'' Nelson didn't mention that it was a Democrat who sponsored the presidential primary bill in the state Senate and all but one Democrat voted for the bill in the House. Where was the e-mail campaign back then?

Those are fighting words for Democrats, similar to someone screaming at an opponent, "You're mother's a whore!". That it's one group of Democrats screaming those words at another promises to make the next 30 days very interesting.

Mitt Romney just won't go away. He doesn't have the charisma of Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson but he keeps moving forward. The January primaries could give him the momentum to be a formidable contender in February. %Gallery-2838%

Take a look at the most recent poll numbers for the states that matter in Jan. 2008.

		Electoral
Date	STATE	Votes	Giuliani	Thompson	Romney	McCain
Jan. 14	Iowa	7	15%	17%	25%	6%
Jan. 19	Nevada	5	21%	1%	23%	16%
Jan. 22	N.H.	4	22%	12%	29%	20%
Jan. 29	S.C	8	21%	25%	11%	7%
Jan. 29	Florida	27	30%	24%	8%	11%

If the numbers hold up, Giuliani will be explaining how he could lose three primaries in a row. It doesn't always pay to be the front-runner.

McCain will be explaining why he lost five out of five and is just getting weaker and weaker. My guess is that he will soon see his support moving over to Fred Thompson. If that happens, McCain will receive less than 10% of the vote in South Carolina and Florida. Could be an early departure for McCain.

Thompson is standing tall and getting stronger. It will be interesting to see if he gains strength after he announces or weakens under the microscope.

On Friday the National Journal, a mainstream Washington publication not known for leaning too far Left or Right for the most part, released its White House 2008 rankings for the Republicans and the Democrats. The authors, Marc Ambinder and Charlie Cook, try to show the likelihood of each candidate winning their respective primary based on the both the conventional benchmarks (represented by traditional polling ) and the subjective -- an appraisal of the candidates' organization, money raising capability and buzz amongst political fanatics (like us!)

On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani's ahead for the first time, followed by John McCain and Mitt Romney. Of those three, Romney is projected to have the fund-raising advantage ($25 million) followed by McCain at $20 million and Giuliani at $15 million.

On the Democratic side, Hillary's ahead followed by Barack Obama and John Edwards. It's the same order in fund-raising: Hillary is leading with $35 million, Obama is in second with $23 million, and Edwards is in third with $15 million.

An odd coincidence on the Edwards front. Pre-announcement of his wife's relapse with cancer last week, fund-raisers were charging $1,000 a plate for breakfasts for the Edwards' Presidential campaign. Post announcement, a bit different:

"A week ago, I was being invited to $1,000 a plate breakfasts with Mrs. Edwards. After the announcement the price went up to $1,250," says a New York-based Democrat. "It was an interesting decision, to put it kindly."

Last June, I presented you with the poll numbers for the Democratic Presidential primaries in the first five states. Hillary was in a comfortable position in four of the states. She was behind in South Carolina. In order to refresh your recollection, here they are again.

		Electoral
Date	STATE	Votes	Obama	Clinton	Edwards
Jan. 14	Iowa	7	18%	22%	21%
Jan. 19	Nevada	5	16%	40%	16%
Jan. 22	New Hampshire	4	22%	36%	12%
Jan. 29	South Carolina	8	34%	25%	12%
Jan. 29	Florida	27	21%	37%	20%

Three months have passed and Hillary is just getting stronger. She appears to be unstoppable. She is way ahead in every state. How can anybody stay in after losing five in a row?

		Electoral
Date	STATE	Votes	Obama	Clinton	Edwards
Jan. 14	Iowa	7	19%	28%	23%
Jan. 19	Nevada	5	19%	33%	15%
Jan. 22	New Hampshire	4	16%	35%	16%
Jan. 29	South Carolina	8	27%	45%	7%
Jan. 29	Florida	27	13%	42%	9%

Priceless. Howard Dean is officially telling Florida Democrats that since they defied him, he's going to make sure their primary doesn't count!

Sure, Florida is America's biggest political swing state. But don't expect the national Democratic Party to back off punishing Sunshine State Democrats for scheduling an early presidential primary. "Their primary essentially won't count, " Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean said of Florida. "Anybody who campaigns in Florida is ineligible for delegates."

Whoa... Anyone who campaigns in Florida won't get delegates? Exactly how is he going to pull that off? Last I looked, Hillary and Obama both had Florida operations, and Hillary was in Boca Raton for a fundraiser last month. Even her national co-chairs, Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Alcee Hastings, are from Florida! Does that mean that Dean has eliminated any chance of Hillary getting any delegates from Florida - just by his own fiat?

With states front-loading primaries so early in the 2008 election season, the whole traditional primary/convention dynamic is quickly turning into a joke. But this is ridiculous.

This is a new record. Four years ago, I was part of the legions of Dean volunteers who worked to make the second quarter fundraising total astounding -- and part of the group that a quarter later raised something like $15 million, blasting all previous records.

Stop the presses. Because Barack Obama is accomplishing something bigger than any of us dreamed of back then. His campaign raised at least $31 million in primary money during the second quarter. That's simply an astounding amount. Hillary Clinton, in comparison, brought in around $27 million, but there's no indication of how much of that was in general election donors.

I'm still far from sold on Obama (I currently lean to Edwards), but the strength and breadth of Obama's grassroots support is admirable -- more people getting involved is great to see.