Mr. Lioz,

You state "In the 2004 congressional elections, the biggest fundraisers won 97% of the time."

I'm sure most people on this listserv know the literature a lot better than I do, so perhaps someone is aware of a good refutation of what follows, but it seems to me that we might have an independent intervening variable here, namely, incumbency.  After all, 396 of 401  incumbent House members (about 99%) seeking reelection in 2004 were, in fact, reelected.  Might incumbency explain their success at BOTH fundraising and winning elections?

Paul