He Won't Spend Your Money To Get Your Votes

Fred Thompson says he's in it to win it, but in Iowa and New Hampshire, he has barely raised enough money to buy a car, let alone enough votes for a nomination.

Raising money where you run is obviously a good idea. If people where you're running are willing to invest in you, they are willing to vote for you, too. Not only that, but local money can often breed multiple levels of activism and outreach are, pound for pound, just as valuable as massive media buys. That activism and outreach has to be a part of your campaign strategy, and in Thompson's case, the money he's raised in those states seems indicative of larger problems. From Huffington:

The fundraising statistics reflect a candidacy that is still in its infancy and facing significant hurdles. Thompson's main competitors for the nomination each have campaigned for months in these two key states and have fully developed on-the-ground operations. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney received roughly $70,000 in third quarter donations from Iowa and some $85,000 from New Hampshire (Romney does have a geographic advantage in the Granite State). Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, meanwhile, brought in about $45,000 these past three months from Iowa donors and $30,000 from New Hampshire.

To be sure, Thompson is betting much of his campaign's success on a good showing in South Carolina, the primary immediately following New Hampshire. But even there - on his relative home turf - Thompson finds himself either matching or being beaten by his main competitors. The approximately $66,000 he raised in South Carolina in the third quarter was just $10,000 more than Romney and nearly $100,000 less than Giuliani.

I know he has plenty of other, non-early-state money. But what's he doing in those early states? Can anyone explain it to me?