$67K is irrelevant (to his argument). $$$ from 67K supporters is relevant---it would mean he can claim more donors than the tea party, and hence that he is significant.
At least, that's his argument. I'm not sure that it would work out that way; as it stands right now, tea party rallies can get media coverage even when they're much smaller than some other kinds of rallies that can't, for a whole bundle of reasons that are mostly not very rational.
EDIT to make clearer where I'm restating his argument and where I'm arguing with it.
At least, that's his argument. I'm not sure that it would work out that way; as it stands right now, tea party rallies can get media coverage even when they're much smaller than some other kinds of rallies that can't, for a whole bundle of reasons that are mostly not very rational.
EDIT to make clearer where I'm restating his argument and where I'm arguing with it.