Just a heads up, people — over the next few days, you’ll be hearing a lot about money.

Today was the first of multiple deadlines for the many candidates running for public office in the District to publicize their fundraising totals and account for their campaign-related expenses. Essentially, it’s the first chance they’ll get to intimidate their opponents with the size of their war chests or, conversely, blithely claim that money isn’t all that matter in politics.

We have already gotten two emails from candidates touting their fundraising success so far. Sam Brooks, who is looking to take the Ward 3 seat currently occupied by Kathy Patterson, let us all know that he had raised $28,150, also noting, “Incredibly, this effort doubles the tally of his nearest opponent in the Ward 3 Council race.” Scott Bolden, who is running against Council-member Phil Mendelson for an At Large spot, similarly promoted himself and the $194,567.90 he has gathered, some $30,000 more than Mendelson. This is merely the tip of the iceberg — expect the mayoral candidates, especially Linda Cropp and Adrian Fenty, to boast about their respective takes in the coming days.

Money serves an obvious purpose in campaigns — it buys yard signs, flyers, stickers, and other campaign-related schwag, not to mention rent office space and pay staff. But more importantly than that, it can serve as evidence of a candidate’s popularity and appeal, allowing the big fundraisers to imply that their opponents are not only poor, but that they are also unpopular. It is around this time that certain candidates will drop out, resigned to the belief that if their more well-funded opponent isn’t a better choice, they can buy enough votes to become one. Of course, public campaign finance reports also allow us to see which candidates are going to be owing favors to certain interests, be they developers, a business lobby, or a certain neighborhood.

We’ll be bringing you more information on the campaign finance reports as it emerges.