Senator Barack Obama received more than ten times what any other presidential candidate was given in campaign contributions in San Miguel County.
Residents here donated $36,825 to Obama’s campaign as of Sept. 30. The second highest amount was given to Gov. Bill Richardson, who ended his bid for the presidential nomination in mid-January. Richardson was given $3,550 from county residents.
Senator Hillary Clinton, a third Democratic candidate, was given $2,500 locally. Two Republican candidates also received local financial support, Senator John McCain with $700 and Mayor Rudy Giuliani with $750. Giuliani ended his bid for the nomination this month, as did Democratic candidate John Edwards, who took in $500 in San Miguel County donations.
Colorado, for the first time ever, is playing a more significant role in the presidential nomination process. The state voted last year to push ahead its caucus date to Feb. 5, yesterday, where local and regional voters will pick candidates along with voters in 21 other states on “Super Tuesday.” So many primaries and caucuses are held on this day that the eventual nominee can often be determined by those results.
In Colorado, the 71 Democratic and 46 Republican delegates at stake won’t be allocated until May, although unofficial results should be available sooner. It’s a great year for Colorado to get involved on the front end of the presidential nominations — both parties have close and exciting races, the Democratic National Convention will be held in Denver this summer, and according the Center for Responsive Politics this is already one of the most expensive races on record. Candidates have already spent in excess of $100 million in television advertising, and more money campaigning for the nomination than during any campaign for the office of president except the 2004 race — and it’s only February. Some of that money is being spent in Colorado this year, because of its new prominence in the presidential race.

Follow the money

San Miguel County is one of the rare “blue” spots in a traditionally “red” state — the county has 2,470 registered Democrats, and just 1,097 registered Republicans. So it’s not a surprise that Barack Obama, the only candidate that has an office in the county, would pull in more fiscal support than the other candidates. But what does that mean?
When supporters take that extra step, not just to vote for a candidate but also to donate money to his or her campaign, they are essentially betting on that candidate to win. For individuals, the payout may be that the candidate will make favorable policies or decisions in office. For political action committees, the payout could be decisions that are favorable enough to their special interest that it results in some kind of financial gain, making the campaign support a good investment.
You no longer have to wait to see a return on your investment when it comes to political candidates, thanks to the futures market. Now you can bet on your candidate, legally, and get paid real money if they succeed.
John Delany, of Intrade, the Dublin company that lets you trade on the political futures market, said that it’s not a new practice. According to Delaney, $50 million has already been traded in this U.S. election cycle on places like his www.intrade.com Web site.
“It’s not new at all,” said Delaney. “We’ve been trading real money on these types of markets since August 1, 2001.”
Futures markets, or prediction markets, trade on the value of everything from farm goods to pharmaceuticals. The operating belief for these markets is that they can predict outcomes better than traditional polls. Futures markets, they say, incorporate new information continuously, and more accurately, because people trade not on what they like but on what they believe to be true because they are betting with their wallets. The futures market, unlike a poll, captures probabilities because people can wager more or less depending on their confidence.
There are two types of trade contract with the political market, binary and linear. Say Senator John McCain is at an 87 percent chance of victory; a buyer could purchase a contract at 87 cents on the dollar. A binary contract would pay out a dollar if McCain wins, and nothing if he loses. A linear contract would pay out the final value McCain carries before the outcome.
The presidential election market may be a good way to make money, but its predictions won’t be replacing polls any time soon as the way to forecast an election, despite the inaccuracies of polls this season. After all, you need money to play the market, but casting your vote is free.

~Writer D. Dion can be reached at norwoodpost@yahoo.com.