In about 5 minutes, June will be over, and the second quarter for political fundraising will be complete. Most eyes will be on the presidential race-- Will Barack Obama outraise Hillary Clinton? How much of his own money will Mitt Romney have spent?

But not me. I'll be eagerly awaiting the filings from candidates in Michigan's 7th Congressional District.

So here's how it's looking:

Tim Walberg: Walberg has to raise plenty of money. He's an incumbent, so it's hard not to, but anything short of a phenomenal second quarter will spark some press speculation and some DCCC and MDP press releases about how weak he is as a candidate. Really, he's got to beat the $148,000 he got last time around, and by a lot. After all, he still wants to scare Joe Schwarz off, right?

The Democrats

Sharon Renier: Unless I missed it somewhere, Sharon Renier hasn't filed with the FEC yet, and doesn't have a campaign apparatus in place for fundraising. So she doesn't need to do anything. But if both Nacht and Berryman post strong numbers, will she still run again? After all, she never broke $60,000 for the entire 2006 cycle.

David Nacht: A prolific commenter named Kyle Sutton has posted this in a few different places:

Without an appropriate heading, I have posted this here and under other stories. I have heard that David Nacht has raised $155,000 this past quarter, making him a very serious contender for the '08 election. This is exactly what the Dems need in a challenger who is going to face Walberg. Walberg has made this race very, very winnable for Democrats, but it will take some financial backing to do so. In raising this money, Nacht has proven himself able to garner the necessary backing. Add that to his impressive resume (working for John Glenn, graduating from U of M and Harvard, unseating a Republican township board, etc.) already featured on the site and you have a very strong candidate.

(Emphasis added.)

Absolutely, yes! If Nacht raised that much-- more than Walberg raised in the first quarter-- it'll put him in a solid place for both the primary and the general election, so long as he keeps it up.

That is, if Kyle is right. If he's wrong, than it's unrealistically raising our expectations, and anything short of that will seem like a disappointment and failure (see: Bill Richardson claiming to outraise John Edwards, and then not). I don't know what kind of connections he has (or if he'd care to elaborate), but this would be a big deal if Nacht raised $155,000.

Jim Berryman: The only way it wouldn't be a big deal for Nacht to raise $155,000 would be if Jim Berryman were to raise even more. I haven't got the foggiest idea where he might be at right now. But here's what he said prior to announcing his candidacy:

Former state Sen. Jim Berryman of Adrian said he has begun talking with supporters to see if he can raise the $2 million to $3 million necessary to challenge the freshman lawmaker.

(Emphasis added.)

With talk like that, a strong second quarter total-- certainly $100,000 or more-- would seem important.

Of course, regardless of what anyone raises, that doesn't mean anything if it doesn't translate into votes. In 2006, both Tim Walberg and Sharon Renier were outraised by other candidates for their respective nominations.

Over the next couple of weeks, FEC filings should become available and I'll post all the data. If any campaigns want to give me a sneak peak at their numbers, feel free.

Labels: David Nacht, Fundraising, Jim Berryman, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg