Can a Socialist Really Raise US$ 150m in a Month?

Because I am not a citizen of the US, I figure that my views about the presidential elections whose outcome is due in a few days are largely irrelevant. In spite of that, one must contend with the fact that the contest has put forth a large contrast between the candidates both in terms of the demeanour of the candidates, organizational nature and the style during the debates.

And yet it is in the same race that one cannot fail to see contradictions and double speak based not on the fact, but prejudice towards one or the other leader. The one area in which the candidates are most apart is in the method and extent of their war chests. No doubt, by making the more risky choice to forgo public financing entirely, candidate Obama appears to have done very well.

Not only has the campaign run on very different principles and style, but the business approach to fund raising is one that those with a fascination for human ingenuity ought to try and understand. Deploying novel mechanisms such as placing value and charging for access to members of the team through receptions conferences, round table meetings and VIP access, there's no doubt that the candidate and his advisers understand far more about the operation of markets than their ideological detractors give them credit for.

As this story on Politico states here, to price Robert Rubin's time at to ask someone to pay US$ 28,500 shows more financial savvy than the shouts of socialism suggests. Candidate Obama may hold the view that the public sector should be in charge of more things than libertarians and conservatives may like, but a socialist he is not.