Some of you may have already seen the "Dinner With Barack" e-mail from David Plouffe (Obama campaign manager). I just got back to my office and read it. This paragraph near the top caught my attention:

"In February alone, more than 94% of our donors gave in amounts of $200 or less. Meanwhile, campaign finance reports show that donations of $200 or less make up just 13% of Senator McCain's total campaign funds, and only 26% of Senator Clinton's."

Is he comparing apples and oranges in a fundamentally-misleading way? He seems to be counting donORS for Obama's campaign DURING FEBRUARY with donATIONS for Clinton and McCain through the ENTIRE CAMPAIGN.

1) Obviously, the number of small donORS vs. the total of the small donATIONS is VERY SKEWED.
2) Since most of the donors that max out probably maxed out before February, the apparent difference between using one (recent) month for Obama and the entire cycle for Clinton and McCain is VERY SKEWED.

I don't know for sure that that is what Plouffe is doing, but the carefully-worded paragraph certainly makes it appear so.

I hate it when ANY candidate/campaign uses math or logic that they must know is misleading. Clinton's campaign did it yesterday with the electoral college vote comparison, but there was at least some basis in logic for it. But, if Obama's campaign is doing what I think they are, then it is JUST misleading without any valid logical basis.