POLITICO skews the truth -- again

POLITICO.com once again fudged the facts when it came to a conservative.

In an article about Newt's fundraising, the website makes it seem that Newt's groups only get money from millionaires. The article says, "And because Gingrich raises little money that comes with the strings of FEC rules limiting donations, his actual fundraising ability as a presidential candidate remains unclear."

To get a contrasting view, one need not read a conservative web site or get a statement from Gingrich's camp.

One would just need to read the Washington Post, in whose pages was an article last week that talked of Newt's "fundraising prowess" and mentioned that "Gingrich's donor base includes nearly 300,000 contributors who gave $200 or less to American Solutions."

Having the name and e-mail addresses of 300,000 small dollar contributors would seem to indicate that he could raise money as a Presidential candidate, no matter how POLITICO wants to spin the facts.

Will Newt be able to raise enough money?

One of the question marks some have about a possible Gingrich run is that he wouldn't be able to raise enough money. I think this is an unfounded complaint, unlike the questions if he could be disciplined enough to stay on message. I think he would be much more able to stay on his talking points than in the past, but I think it's a legitimate point.

But when it comes to raising money, few are as good as Newt, as the Washington Post reports.

He wouldn't be able write a very large check to himself like Mitt Romney could, but American Solutions itself has, according to many, a contact list with two million names. 300,000 of those gave less than $200 dollars. That is 90% of the contributors to the group, which can accept unlimited funds. A common refrain from critics is that the amount of money that it raised does not mean much going forward since Presidential campaigns cannot accept anything over $2,400 in each of the primary and general elections.

That argument is rendered moot if 300,000 gave less than $200. Furthermore, if that many were willing to give for simply issue advocacy, not electoral purposes, how many more will give to a Gingrich campaign?

Of the 2 million names and deep fundraising base, the Post writes, "The resources could give Gingrich a major advantage in the GOP field, which includes several hopefuls who have relatively little experience with national fundraising."

If all the reports are true -- and Gingrich is a candidate by March -- the question, "Can he win the Republican nomination?" will be more dependent on the matter of his message discipline, rather than money.

(For more on Gingrich's finances, check out an earlier post of mine: http://teamgingrich.blogspot.com/2010/12/newts-pac-raises-second-most-among-gop.html).