Smart Politics Misses the Obvious About Bachmann & the Media.

Smart Politics implies Michele Bachmann's mad pursuit of the national right wing media is a strategy for raising money at home.

In short, Congresswoman Bachmann’s increased profile is generating her more support at the grass roots level – particularly in Minnesota. This growth can be seen by the fact that Bachmann raised 77.3 percent more money in contributions from individuals in Q1 2009 than in Q1 2007. Bachmann even raised 5.0 percent more money from individuals in Q1 2009 than in Q1 2008 – an election year.

Now, Eric Ostermeier of Smart Politics has a PhD in Political Science and I only have a BA in Detecting BS, but I do beg to differ.

First, we don't know if there is any correlation between national media appearances and increased fundraising of any type. Second, the sort of national media Rep. Bachmann is pursuing — Hannity, Glenn Beck, O'Reilly, etc. — are the most receptive outlet for her extremist views. Actual news media, including those in her home district, have higher standards. (Do read the St. Cloud Times link.)

Let's take his observations in order.

Congresswoman Bachmann’s media blitz is actually landing her a greater percentage of funds raised statewide.

True, Bachmann has raised one percentage point more from Minnesota donors for the quarter than a year ago when she was running for re-election. But she's pulling in a smaller percentage from the state than in 2005 and 2006 when she was first running for national office.

The real story, I think, could be that Bachmann's 1Q 2009 increase in contributions — both in dollar and percentage terms — was her smallest year-over-year gain ever.

Ostermeier's great revelation, by the way, hinges on a very small swing. National donors gave about $1,000 less and Minnesota donors gave $12,000 more in an off-cycle year. 

Bachman’s national profile seems to be generating an increasing percentage of contributions from individuals, as opposed to PACS.

Again, there's been no causation established between increased fund raising and making controversial statements and playing loose with the facts. I think a very reasonable premise could be that PACs have figured out Rep. Bachmann will be totally useless in advancing any agenda in Congress. That's been her record so far, and her loony and uncivil critiques will make her even less effective, if that's even possible.

A PAC would rationally redeploy its support to more effective advocates. Individuals might not make their contributions on the same basis.

I will leave it to commentators who are happy digging through FEC reports to add more to the critique. For example, does that $12,000 increase from Minnesota really represent "more support at the grass roots level"?

The conclusion to be drawn from Bachmann's aggressive media strategy seems quite obvious. She's gotten to where she is by being a publicity hound [Note: Original version edited to be more respectful and equally descriptive]. And when you get free attention — especially from the media that reach your core voters — money is secondary.