The first Democratic primary in the 2010 U.S. Senate race is officially over. Now we are just waiting on the final results.

The contest won’t be decided by votes. It is dollars that count and the final tally will be available at the end of January when the candidates’ year-end campaign finance reports are due at the Federal Elections Commission.

Former state Senator Cal Cunningham has announced that he raised $320,000 since entering the race. Secretary of State Elaine Marshall and Chapel Hill Attorney Kenneth Lewis haven’t said how much they have raised.

An email from Cunningham to potential supporters December 18 asked for a contribution before December 31 so it would show up on the report and “show Senator Burr that we will have the resources to win.”

Another email from Cunningham on December 30 asked again for a contribution because “because early fundraising success helps generate further success.”

That’s not a knock on Cunningham. He is playing the game under the rules we have allow to be established. Money, not ideas, is clearly the first measuring stick in politics.

One reason that Burr is perceived as the favorite in November is that he had almost $3.5 million in the bank when the last reports were filed.  That’s not much of a surprise when you consider that he has received more contributions from the pharmaceutical industry than any other member of the Senate and has held 35 fundraising events in 2009, also more than any of his Senate colleagues.

Money doesn’t only decide the first primary in the high profile U.S. Senate race.  Democratic and Republican legislative leaders are scrambling to raise money for their candidates next fall. Almost every story about the recent retirement of Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand mentioned his prowess as a fundraiser.

Ask any political consultant what’s the first thing they ask a candidate considering running for office and they’ll tell you it’s how much personal money the candidate can give to their campaign and how much they think they can raise immediately from friends and family.

That rules out a credible campaign for all but a small number of people, which doesn’t sound much like democracy.

Democratic leaders in Washington have reportedly decided that Cunningham is their choice to run against Burr in November. That shouldn’t matter to folks in North Carolina, but it will if the national Democrats pour millions of dollars into Cunningham’s campaign.

Financial support from party bigwigs doesn’t mean Cunningham isn’t a good candidate or that he wouldn’t make a good Senator.  And just as importantly, big money for Cunningham doesn’t mean that Marshall or Lewis wouldn’t be a good Senator either.  

It does mean that they may have a harder time not only getting their message to voters but convincing the political class that they have a chance.  Money may not be able to buy you love, but it buys candidates political credibility every election cycle.

It’s hard to think of a sadder commentary on the state of our current political system than that.