(FORTUNE Magazine) – On the face of it, no business executive worth his country club membership should give money to Bill Bradley. The former New Jersey Senator is the most liberal candidate in the presidential contest. He would spend nearly every cent of the federal budget surplus on universal health coverage; if that didn't pay for it, he would consider raising taxes. He would register every handgun and fund every congressional election with taxpayer dollars. "Only government can balance the clout of private power," he has written, a conviction that makes him the darling of interventionist Democrats like Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich.

How, then, has Bradley managed to raise so much money from Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and hundreds of corporate suites in between? Sure, there are plenty of limousine liberals out there, especially on Wall Street, which is having its best year ever. But political giving isn't always about self-interest. Sometimes it's about self-delusion. Donors, for whom the $1,000 maximum contribution is often a pittance, decide whom to back more with their hearts than with their heads. Bradley, for example, is the toast of Wall Street because he's always been the toast of Wall Street--from the day he stepped onto the basketball court at Princeton (then a feeder college to the Street) and later as a New York Knick. He's won over non-New Yorkers because he's smart (a Rhodes scholar) and charming (in a sardonic way) and doesn't seem like what he is: a politician.

As the sole Democratic opponent of Vice President Al Gore, Bradley is also his party's anti-Clinton, a good thing to be in the wake of the Lewinsky and campaign-finance scandals. "I backed Clinton the first time around, and I've regretted it every day since," says Bradley supporter Herbert Allen, the prominent investment banker and CEO of Allen & Co. "He's crooked, and I didn't know that. I think he's a congenital liar. He's lucky he brought along his own attorney general. That probably saved him from prosecution." Like many Bradley supporters, Allen wants nothing to do with the Clinton Administration, and that includes its Vice President. "I don't believe there's any separation between Gore and Clinton," Allen says, and then concludes, "There's an anger and a revulsion with this Administration that I've never seen before among Democrats."

But Bradley is more than just the Democrats' un-politician in an anti-Washington year. For decades he has wooed and won over hundreds of executives. Irving Weiser, CEO of the Minneapolis brokerage Dain Rauscher, says, "Bradley is what a lot of business people look for to hire. You want somebody smart who's got experience, someone who is a good listener, a person who's not afraid to make decisions based on the right thing to do." During three terms in the Senate, Bradley quietly met quarterly with a group of senior executives and others to hear their advice on issues. Participants included John W. "Jay" Jordan of Jordan Industries and Lou Susman, a managing director of Salomon Smith Barney, both now Bradley fundraisers. After he left the Senate in 1997, Bradley was named vice chairman of J.P. Morgan's prestigious International Council, and he can now claim that firm's chairman, Douglas Warner, as a financial supporter. He also spoke for pay to dozens of corporate meetings, where he made many connections.

He did some of his most vigorous prospecting in Silicon Valley during the year he lived nearby as a lecturer at Stanford. He methodically met with company CEOs, venture capitalists, young entrepreneurs, lawyers, and investment bankers. His lengthy, probing visits inspired a rush of campaign donations from Bay Area tech companies; in fact, Bradley has collected more from Silicon Valley than either Gore or George W. Bush. Many of his givers are die-hard Republicans or people who had never contributed before but who admire Bradley for his intellect, integrity, and interest--in them. Bob Fitzwilson, director of Portola Group, an investment management firm, says, "He's one of the smartest people you'll ever find, and he was interested in drilling down to find out how the system works. I've always voted Republican, but Bill epitomizes the Good Man."

Indeed, many Bradley donors are smitten neophytes who didn't know--and don't much care to know--his specific policy views. Some are as starstruck as Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. After Schultz's planned 45-minute meeting with Bradley turned into a two-hour session four years ago, Schultz went home and told his wife he hoped Bradley would run for President. "I felt that way from the first day," he says. Bradley fundraiser John Thornton, president of Goldman Sachs, was enchanted even before their first meeting. Thornton remembers telling Bradley, "I'm going to be a sucker for you because I watched you at the Garden [Madison Square Garden] when I was 10." Asked recently if President Bradley would be good for Goldman Sachs' business, Thornton confessed, "I haven't given it a second's thought."

Not that Bradley would likely hurt big financial interests. Thomas Labrecque, ex-president of Chase Manhattan; Paul Volcker, ex-chairman of the Federal Reserve; and Richard Fuld, CEO of Lehman Brothers, would not be giving money to a politician with dangerous economic notions. On the contrary, they like Bradley partly because he understands their business. Donald Roth, a Princeton classmate of Bradley's who went on to head Merrill Lynch's European operations, has long been amazed at how well Bradley understood global markets. "He knew more about it than I did," said Roth, who now runs a company that invests in developing countries. Adds Tone Grant, a principal of the Chicago brokerage Refco Group: "Bradley is very well respected by central bankers around the world because of his depth of knowledge."

Bradley's command of the issues is so strong that he's been able to get some real estate tycoons to forget that his Tax Reform Act of 1986 sent their industry into a tailspin. Bradley's donors include Sam Zell, Jeffrey Hines of Hines Real Estate, and Joe Azrack, CEO of Boston's AEW Capital Management. "I don't know if he'll be good for real estate or not," Azrack says. "I try to make a judgment based more on what's good for the country."

Not that fundraisers haven't occasionally been rattled by Bradley's appeal to the left. After Wellstone became the first Senator to support him, Weiser confronted Bradley "to express my concern" that the endorsement might "position him to the left of Gore." Bradleyites shuddered even more when Robert Reich endorsed him. Other business backers grumbled after Bradley announced his costly health-care plan and later when he left the door open to tax hikes. But no one bolted. They appear to believe that Bradley is playing to liberals because that's what he must do to win the Democratic nomination. "He may appear to be liberal on social issues, but really he's fiscally conservative," asserts Grant of Refco. "Everybody is going to be pragmatic along the way, then they all land in the center."

Such blind loyalty has filled Bradley's coffers. He's already collected $25 million and probably will reach the maximum allowed to receive federal matching funds (nearly $30 million). Bush, who has declined matching funds, has raised more than $65 million, much of it from business executives who tend to be unshakably Republican. Gore also is expected to raise the maximum and, with backing from the Democratic establishment, remains far ahead in national polls. Still, Bradley's allure is undiminished. "It's the easiest fundraising I've ever had to do," says Joseph Flom of Skadden Arps, the mergers and acquisitions law firm. That doesn't mean Bradley will win. The same aloof, intellectual demeanor that attracts rich donors may also turn off the general electorate. In the end, Bradley may prove to be a better fundraiser than politician.