"Yeeeeeaah, if you could just finish up those..."

"... campaign finance reports, that'd be grrrreat."

-- How TPS CF reports should not be interpreted (paywall):

Democratic political consultant Mustafa Tameez said Hall might have to show more widespread support to drag Parker on stage repeatedly; Hall reported raising $2 million as of June 30, $1.7 million of that his own cash.

"Let's say Ben Hall comes out and he raises $2.2 million and he only puts in $200,000 of his own seed money," Tameez said. "Then Parker's more likely to have multiple debates with him because he has substantial support and she wants to clarify her positions. All challengers want to take it to the incumbent and point out one of the 10 things that are wrong with the city at no expense to themselves, and no incumbent would ever allow that."

Tameez -- considered one of the city's premier political advisors, certainly a heavy player in the local insiders' clique --  seems to be suggesting to Mayor Parker that she execute the Rick Perry 2010 strategy of avoiding debates. Would that really be the best thing for her to do?

Update: Not to be outdone, Campos tops that for stupid.

Commentary doesn’t want to hear the other candidates in a debate and I’m thinking most folks don’t either.  I’m betting The Mayor’s Campaign didn’t do a whole lot of opposition research on the other folks like they did on Hall so don’t throw in that the other candidates have to participate.  Plus they haven’t staffed up and they haven’t plunked down a couple of mil of their own dough into the race.

Commentary is, as usual, a fucking moron. If there is anybody left in this town taking anything he says seriously, then they deserve what they get.

-- How CF reports should be interpreted (and then used by a political campaign):

Leave it to a college paper to scoop the bloggers on this , but it is definitely worth a read. Many of my fellow bloggers, me included, posted fundraising totals from candidates, including those in the running for District I. I had noticed a few individual snarks on Facebook toward some of the candidate totals, but nothing newsworthy or in a press release from other candidates. The college paper, The Venture, found something.

“As you can see from the finance reports, Mr. Mendez has a number of overvalued in-kind donations, lots of self-funding and he only has $12,000 cash on hand. To that end, alarm bells are ringing throughout District I because it appears he burned through the cash he allegedly raised. The hard working men and women of District I don’t spend money like that,” said Robert Gallegos, who is one of the candidates running against Mendez in District I.

Mendez’s campaign manager, Joaquin Martinez, did not provide a response for this story before deadline.

Looks like a well-worded direct hit by Gallegos on that one, stating that fundraising will not make the difference, rather, experience in the district will -- a theme on which he is running.

Precisely right.

So, to summarize (and despite how this post may have been interpreted): there's not anything inherently wrong with the reporting of campaign fundraising and spending; there is something wrong with how it is analyzed, and who is doing the analyzing.

Agendas coming out to play and all that.