How is this possible?

MSNBC reports:

"The campaign is clearly running low on cash, although advisers would not say how much money — or how little — Mrs. Clinton currently has. The campaign had started April with over $10 million in unpaid debts, and Mrs. Clinton was vastly outspent by Senator Barack Obama in North Carolina and Indiana."

What makes it possible for one opponent to outspend the other without incurring debt while the other is lending to theiir individual campaign? It must be the case that one of the campaigns is raising significantly more money than the other. Fund raising, particularly among small donors is one of the benchmarks for a successful campaign.

The other, and a measurable standard by which we can assess a candidate's abilities as an administrator, would be their abilities to spend within their means (not incur debt).