Dem Fundraising Drops. Give Us Real Democrats, And We'll Donate Again.
By Susie Madrak Friday Sep 25, 2009 11:00amThe D.C. crowd really does live in another world, don't they? Interesting that this article concludes the Dems are having trouble raising money is that they're not business-friendly enough!
The reporter doesn't mention that the netroots community (aka the Democratic ATM) has stopped donating to the DCCC and the DSCC, and instead donate directly to candidates - mostly because we're so disgusted with the Blue Dogs Rahm Emanuel and Co. have recruited.
The party's obliviousness is costing them money at a time they really need it. Worse, it will end up costing us a majority. But why should we give them our money when they're more interested in serving corporations than they are in us?
Democratic political committees have seen a decline in their fundraising fortunes this year, a result of complacency among their rank-and-file donors and a de facto boycott by many of their wealthiest givers, who have been put off by the party's harsh rhetoric about big business.
The trend is a marked reversal from recent history, in which Democrats have erased the GOP's long-standing fundraising advantage. In the first six months of 2009, Democratic campaign committees' receipts have dropped compared with the same period two years earlier.
The vast majority of those declines were accounted for by the absence of large donors who, strategists say, have shut their checkbooks in part because Democrats have heightened their attacks on the conduct of major financial firms and set their sights on rewriting the laws that regulate their behavior.
As the battle over President Obama's effort to overhaul the health-care system reached a fever pitch this summer, the three national Republican committees combined to bring in $1.7 million more than their Democratic counterparts in August. The pair of Democratic committees tasked with raising money for House and Senate candidates -- and doing so at a time when the party holds its strongest position on Capitol Hill in a generation -- have watched their receipts plummet by a combined 20 percent with little more than a year to go before the November 2010 midterm elections.
Gee, Rahm. We didn't have that problem when Howard Dean was DNC chair, did we?
Large-scale defeats in the midterms could be a crippling blow to the ambitious agenda mapped out by Obama's top advisers, particularly if they happen in the Senate, where Democrats caucus with a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority. The party will have to work furiously to defend at least six Senate seats and as many as 40 in the House, including many snatched from Republicans.
"If they take them back, this is the end of the road for what Barack and I are trying to do," Vice President Biden said Monday at a fundraiser for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), whose district was held by a Republican for more than two decades before her 2006 victory.
Democrats said a struggling economy is only partly to blame for the poor fundraising performance and acknowledged a more perilous problem: satisfaction among activists that the party now holds the White House, 60 votes in the Senate and 60 percent of the House.
Login or Register to post comments.
When I read the article mentioned above about the lack of donations to Democrats I thought the same thing. No one is giving money because the Democrats refuse to do the things we want them to do. They really need Howard Dean to show them the light. For example, the public option is mandatory to gain ground troops support. I mean people really wanted a medicare type plan for everybody but at least get the public option implemented to show some kind of progress. But it seems Democratic leadership does not understand this.
I keep getting emails from the DCCC and the DSCC asking for money. I always respond that the candidates they would use my money to back are not Democrats, in my opinion. I tell them that because they no longer represent the People, any monies I have go to Blue America/Act Blue. If they want me to start donating to them, they have to start backing real Democrats. No more Rahm Emanuels. No more "Centrists" or "Moderates". No more Council of Foreign Relations true believers. No more Trilateral Commission members. No more Bilderburgers. No more corporatists. No more Bribe-O-Crats. If they refuse to represent the People, they have nothing to offer. They aren't part of the solutions, only a part of the problems.
My emails do get through, but it seems to make no impression on them. I think that would change, though, if they got the same response from a significant population of the people that they solicit by email.
...........which has come to mean Spector-recruiting, Rahmie the ZIONIST WHORE. 'not business friendly' GAG that little, PUKIE, intrepid 'stenographer' just couldn't understand..............
When the DSCC calls, my wife tells them just that: "Give us real Democrats, and we'll donate again."
They get an earful.
You don't think the DSCC wouldn't love to replace Nelson or Landrieu or Lincoln with more reliable "liberal" Senators?
You bet they would.
But if you're giving earfuls, then I hope you're telling them just how the DSCC can get a prog Dem elected in Nebraska, or Louisiana or Arkansas.
Or maybe you can share that insight with us here.
they don't. The minute they start listening to Howard Dean again I will consider giving them money.
the DLC DSCC / DCCC are just what they want to be. they are operations to gain corporate funding, no more. these are the clinton developed and inspired organizations. they are why clinton gave us GATT and NAFTA. they are no accident. do not be fooled by the (D).
The "how" is the money, and the only "why" to get that money to flow is to run real progressive candidates. The first few might lose -- money can't solve anything on its own after all, though it can help develop a ground organization for later success -- but the money just will not be there for the DSCC if they continue to run unreliable candidates. The internet -- especially through the power of aggregating donations under online PACs like FDLPAC and ActBlue -- has made it possible to directly fund the candidates whose efforts have earned our support. This directly undercuts the intrinsic value of party-led Congressional/Senatorial Campaign Committees. Especially because their money often goes to support incumbents' reelection campaigns against primaries from candidates who more directly represent their constituents' interests -- or rather to tide over incumbents who have spent their war chests on those primaries -- the DSCC/DCCC have precious little claim to our hard-earned dollars.
I am serious.
Honestly, the only thing I have seen the Democrats agreeing upon for the better part of the past 3 decades is that somehow there is always a next election when we need to elect them and that somehow they can't currently do their "jobs" because of that.
That whole "fool me once..." comes to mind in this case.
I only donate through ACT BLUE. You can choose which progressive candidates you with to give money to individually. The democratic party has abandoned me and will never ever see another dime or ounce of support from me again. I will select which people get my money from here on out thanks to my homies at Firedoglake.
Thanks for the post.
We voted for things to change in Washington. We voted to correct the damage done by 8 years of corporate rule. We voted to bring back the good name of the US around the world. We voted to end the wars we found ourselves in because of the greed of individuals and corporations. We voted to blunt the power of religious fanaticism in this country, and its role in the wars mentioned above. We voted to once again feel as if the US cared about the welfare of its own people, and I could go on and on.
Funding is down simply because what we voted for, espoused in many of Obama's pre-election speeches, is simply not happening - not that it isn't happening fast enough, but that it is not even apparent that attempts will ever be made to make it happen.
I sent them a page-full in their last snail mail. Along with my page-ful, I sent them junk mail coupons (to me at this point they are just junk mail anyway), so I thought they might like some more of what they have become. I give directly now, and regardless of state and district. A pox on the DCCC and DSCC
Sorry, but I can't take the absolute position you have about what you state in your first paragraph.
Sure, Obama doesn't get 100% on my scorecard, but this is only 9 months in. Furthermore, the "good name" is coming back, witness his UN speech and Security Council agreement on nukes, and believe me,
if you think the world thinks he's GW Bush 2.0, you're crazy. Obama can't "blunt" religious fanaticism, but how many Regent University graduates has he stuck in the DOJ, for example? As for the wars, Obama never ran on ending "both wars". So if you're disappointed, you weren't listening during the campaign.
Anyway, I have lived too long, and under too many Republican presidents and Republican congresses to
want to have it happening again in the next few years. And I will have my Obama scorecard in 2012, but i'm sure not going to let this early one open the door to the GOP.
THINK!
Regent University graduates in the DOJ is because they are still there from the Bush admin. Why do you assume they are gone? And it's only "9 months in?" We haven't actually seen anything change. Just because he has charmed you with his ability to "talk pretty," doesn't mean very much to thinking people. You are entitled to your opinion, but you don't get to dictate to others who disagree with you.
Instead he has appointed a straight up collection of CFR's, TC's and BB's. He isn't representing the people, except for when it is unavoidable.
especially in the Justice Department. When is Obama going to get rid of the 93 attorneys Bush left behind? And that's just Justice. Why is the financial team led by Goldman Sachs. Why are there no efforts to end two wars, especially the one they know absolutely for a fact is bogus?
Obama need to clean house instead of sitting on his hands and giving us more of these orange alerts about Muslim Teenagers.
I do think - and that is why I wrote my post.
Some of what you say makes sense, and I respect your commentary, but most of what I said initially does so as well.
Unlike you, I am not about to denigrate your entire post because I don't agree wholeheartedly with your rhetoric.
Pot - kettle, etc....
It appears that all we hear is, we are trying to work with the republicans. When the republicans were in power they said fuck you we won the election we will do what we want reguardless.
I am tired of excuses and being bummed for money so some other slimey bastard can make his way to washington to make even more money from the revolving door and have a life long job at my expense!
We don't need any career polliticians! Their jobs should be turned over to another citizen at the expiration of each term. There should be no retirement, there should be no lifetime health care unless all Americans have the same! These jobs don't require any special talent to do them. They were designed for the average person, not the well connected! They have been stolen and preverted into todays sick system. It needs to be stopped, yesterday is to late. We need to clean out the rats nest in washington, it is spreading the plague!
republicanism is a mental illness!
The Eunuchs, given the House in 2008 whined they didn't have enough now they control both Houses and the WH and the Eunuchs REFUSE to do what they were elected to do and insisted that the SPECIAL INTERESTS are way more important then any constituent. Well my wallet and check book is remaining closed until these Eunuchs can get it together. Remember Money Talks BULLSHIT WALKS are you ready for a long walk.
I hope it's blue, because you're letting those Blue Dogs influence your whole thinking. Now, if your congressman is a certified Blue Dog, and you're unhappy, then by all means withhold money - and let him/her know it.
But for the sake of our own future, send some or all of that money to another Dem, because there are
some good first/second term Dems under attack (and a couple of them might also be Blue Dogs, but
not hard core. I'm thinking of Larry Kissell, for example, who needs all the monetary help in NC he can get).
nancy and Harry and Rahm have no influence? Obama is the party leader and he sits on his hands? all those 'dems with a future' are being muzzled by the Dem leadership! and the press has a total blackout on Dems unless they can show dissension. we started turning over the house and senate in 2004. We are not done yet. I do not know what channel your political TV is on, bu I can tell you mine is tuned to H.Dean and the Progressives. I like their beat. A.Weiner is a winner in my book. the new guys need to buck up and tell the leaders to follow their constituencies. That needs to happen. You're recommending another round of 'sit on your hands for another election cycle and thing will magically get better'. Sorry, I stopped playing in 2000 when they showed us not only that they can steal any election they want, but that the supreme court they stacked, with the help of some Dems, was also part of the RepublisKKKum team.
That's the point leadership needs to stress as Blue Dogs whine about their waning influence. When their behavior stops dragging down party-wide fundraising efforts and stops hindering both policy action and reelection for their colleagues, then maybe their voices will carry more weight within the caucus and among the voters.
Give the American people what they want and the special interests will be damned. It still takes the people's vote to win elections. As more and more people do not trust mainstream media they are just as likely not to buy into the lies and swiftboat ads that the special interests will attempt to turn back the tide.
It's not just giving them what they want...(whatever that may be)....it's making sure they actually come out and vote in 2010.
Our losses, if we have them, will be primarily because we sat home or sat at our keyboards and didn't bother to doing anything to help GOTV.
as soon as they stop pussy footin around and follow the will of the people, and not the corporations.
Not without a huge shove from massive crowds demanding their country back. However, the corporate owners see it as their country now. After all, they bought it.
And moonsha, I respect your posts and you, but elections are so easily fixed, and have been fixed, that the option to withdraw one's vote just elicits chuckles in DC.
Things will never change because in order to put a "good" candidate up, they need to be vetted by the moneyed interests. Who controls the media? Nothing will change short of a complete system overhaul.
Look at Dennis Kuchinich, lots of people liked him yet he was virtually ignored by the media.
Both treated the same way.
I get fund raising emails from the DCCC all the time. Sometimes several in one week. I haven't given a penny in the last year or more - ever since I came to the realization that my local Blue Dog, Melissa Bean, is really a stealth rethug. Lately I've been deleting their emails without even reading them and I'm getting really close to unsubscribing altogether. Didn't realize that I was part of a larger trend though. Hope Rahm is reading this thread....
with the way they are handling things, then blocked them. I hate being bothered by lying pick-pockets.
You're stuck with Bean, I'm stuck with Roskam. Bean and Roskam are 2 peas in a pod. Bean is no Democrat, but Roskam is a true blue Repug. I still think we would have been better off with Tammy Duckworth. Roskam is way way far right.
How obtuse!
Soooo, time for an new party to give money to?
Paul Kane (at the WaPo) really doesn't "get it". Of course, it also looks like Rahm Emanuel, VP Joe Biden, and especially Pres. Barack Obama don't "get it" either. The Corporatist Dems have made their beds, and are lying with dogs (Blue Dogs), and now they have fleas as well. The DNC, DLC, DCCC, and DSCC have vastly miscalculated their popularity among rank-and-file Democrats, as well as liberal independents. Their constituency is not "we the people" but their corporate donors. "We the people" are IMHO both more fiscally conservative and socially liberal -- a true majority of voters, who are sick and tired of corporate welfare and interminable foreign military adventures at the expense of the "General Welfare" of "we the people".
"We the people" have brought forth electoral wins in 2006 and 2008, in spite of serious vote manipulation by our corporatist opposition. A large part of those successes can be attributed to the organizational 50-state skills of Howard Dean. The DNC and DLC liked those victories, but were frankly scared of an organized effective liberal populist electorate -- pure anathema to their corporatist paymasters.
Personally, I miss Howard Dean's leadership -- enough to refuse to support, either monetarily or with my vote, any more Corporatist Democrats, the Blue Dog Democrats, or the DINOs out there in Congress-critter land. Perhaps it really is time for a viable 3rd party that I can support.
Rahm Emanuel and his ilk can go suck dried shite!
take the blame for Bush Co's messes, and to attempt to clean them up. With respect to the Wall Street fiasco at least, the more I learn about it, the more I realize it is impossible to fix. Like Alice says, it is the biggest heist in history.
Well said!
your mandatory health insurance coverage.
Much truth in that one.
I thankfully have a British wife and now live in Ol' Blighty with her so health care mandates aren't something I have to deal with.
I've worked out the cost of the mandates though, it ends up that you still pay more than I do out of your checks in taxes and health care costs. You'd be saving a ton of money by having our taxes raised and getting true single payer.
I kid you not.
If Dean were to start a third party I'd send him money from over here to help out. He can take Kucinich and all the other real progressives (all 5 of them) that are left to languish in the Dem party.
Bet they'd get massive support.
I've sent $100 each to DSCC and DCCC. And to date about twice that amount to the 3 Reps (one in-state, 2 in other states) that I've chosen to support.
I realize people are unhappy with the DSCC and DCCC - though I'm not exactly sure the reasons are all that valid.
But I also realize that if we let EXCUSES keep us from doing what we do best: donate money (sorry to say, because we're not always that great collectively at acting on the ground), if we let EXCUSES keep us from doing our part, then just say hello to daily filibusters in the Senate and Speaker John Boehner. And I wish I were exaggerating...
And if you think it doesn't matter, I invite you to watch the "ACORN 9/12" video on this very site now.
I am not going to let Blue Dogs result in having Republicans in power again. Ask yourselves if that's what you want too.
Send it to me. I promise to pay as much attention to you as they have!!
The DCCC contributed in 2008 to a number of candidates that I also supported, and who were in that wave of new congressmen.
The DSCC has consistently made good use of its money. The fact that a handful of Senate Dems aren't going to do what I want is not the fault of the DSCC.
Neither body is perfect of course, but I sure hope you're not holding out for that.
And while I can quibble with positions taken, I have few problems with Shumer.
If I can get you to see the truth, I will have done you a favor. However, I will always defend your right to have your own opinion. I am curious about something. What do you anticipate will be the outcome on the health insurance reform issue? Do you anticipate getting your money's worth out of DC?
I soured on donating money to korporate kandidates after donating to John Edwards' presidential campaign and then watching him drop out of it two days later. That sure felt good.
Still, you gotta marvel at the utter cluelessness of that article (and it's writer). Yeah, because the Dems or so anti-business (!), that's why nobody's donating...
The article makes it clear that the monetary decline is in part the result of "large donors" (i.e., corporations" ) scaling back. On the one hand it's a good sign, but on the other, it's creating a hole that
needs to be in part filled by "us".
And I remind everyone that this will be even more criticial if/when the SCOTUS rules that there are no limits on corporate campaign donations.
Granted, you can't buy every race, but a steady stream of lies and fear from negative ads will work if
not combatted.
every race.
especially in the south. and Penn. and Ohio.
dnegri, no offense, but you sound like the old "Paul in LA" who was a turboposting shill for Pelosi. We were always just a few weeks away from some master scheme that she had been biding her time to reveal that would make all the toadying and enabling of the Bush regime worth it. There was always some "other thing" that needed to happen before she could spring it though.
We've had the same thing from the blue dogs; wait for the '04 election, the '06 election, the '08 election, a majority in the House, a majority in the Senate, a President, a super-majority in the Senate. Frankly I'm tired of waiting and I'm tired of enabling Republican programs and pogroms. You're certainly entitled to play along, as for me, no thanks, I'll take my chances on *real* progressives, even if they don't win their elections.
The Democrats control the House, the Senate and the White House. Yet they still can't seem to get anything done. I stopped donating to the DNC after last years nomination fiasco, This year I've stopped donating to the DCCC and anyone else calling to fund raise in the name of a group. From here on out I'll pick and choose the candidates I'll contribute to. It takes much more work on my part to research voting records and the like, but I only want to support real progressives.
that things were not going to be as promised was when Obama dissed progressives (those on the blogs, anyway) who wanted marijuana legalized.
This is a real-world issue for thousands of incarcerated and millions of those who use (not to mention the burden on the prison system). 5 martini's is okay. A joint will get you time (it is classified right along with heroin).
It's only gotten worse since then.
F* the Democrats (except for a few). There's nothing worse than a pack of lying cowards.
One issue voters are the scourge of an enlightened Democracy.
Who said that is the only issue? I said that that's where it began. People who can't comprehend what they read are the scourge of an enlightened Democracy.
Just so you STFU, I'll include the double wars, extraordinary rendition (or whatever they call the disappeared, nowadays), and kowtowing to corporate interests.
If dems fail to enact a health care plan that actually does help working people, then I'll be doing my part to help in the formation of a 3rd party, regardless of how pragmatic it may be.
Agreed! If we don't get a decent health care plan, the only option we have is to start a non-corporatist party. Yes, I know that will hurt the Democratic Party, but they haven't been listening to us, so screw them if they get hurt.
And don't anyone reply with an insult to my intelligence, re: "yeah, but that'll just help repigs, and YOU'LL be responsible" crap. Maybe what the Democratic Party needs is a good swift kick in the groin to let them know we tired of them being "Republican Lite."
?
We gave a lot of money to the DSCC etc and have little to show for it.
In the meantime I will support certain candidates, specifically Robin Carnahan in her battle to beat neo-loser Blunt here in MO.
But until the Democrats start doing the job we expect of them, it might be slim pickins. They need a wakeyp call, especially Rahm, who seems to be personally responsible for these Blue Dog conservatives.
Maybe the the party will wake up and realize that we wont support them no matter what they do. They need to wake up and realize that we voted them in to do work for us. They don't work for us we don't support them. We are not the zombies the that the Republicans are. Don't get me wrong, I will not vote for a Republican but I will not vote for a Democrat that acts like a Republican. I just wont vote
Sitting home is a de facto vote for a Republican. I just hope you're not in a Dem district where the outcome is or will be in doubt.
It's not a question of "no matter what they do". You've got to show me exactly what you are upset at. And
how you're not happy with the stance taken by Nancy Pelosi on these issues, for example.
And please try to stay rational, meaning you take into account the reality of getting things done in the House and the Senate.
before the Presidential election. What did anyone on the liberal/progressive side get for their money? Anything? Anyone? Look how much money the corporations contributed to his campaign. What did they get from him? Where should I begin... I think you are just reluctant to admit to yourself that you made a bad investment.
That could actually work, if the elections are not fixed. Oh, shit. Well it felt good to believe that for 5 seconds.
Biden said, "If they take them back, this is the end of the road for what Barack and I are trying to do."
Umm, we still haven't figured out what you are trying to do Joe???
Vote Write-In
I work hard for the money I have, and I use it to vote for what I believe.
I had no problem recognizing the bullshit and hypocrisy with the Bush crew and I'm not having any problem recognizing the bullshit being served by the Rahm Emanuel crowd either.
And since I've realized I'm much more Progressive than Barack Obama and the glow of last year's campaign has worn off, I carefully make my campaign contributions cafeteria style. If you are a candidate, you'll have to prove your Progressive credentials. And I'm not scared anymore about a Conservative taking office due to the fact that some Blue Dog doesn't get my money. Conservatives will always screw things up which will discredit them further.
Presently, my money is betting on Alan Grayson (D-FL) and Anthony Weiner (D-NY) -- both are smart and Progressive.
Grayson needs it more than Weiner. Grayson is being targeted, Weiner is safe.
I don't think stopping donations to Weiner just because he's in a safe district is the right move though. He needs less, so give him less; but what will give individual donations influence with the less-progressive Dems is rewarding forthright legislators -- bad ones usually don't enjoy much monetary support on an individual basis anyway, so there's no real way to punish them. If other Congresspeople see that Weiner's principled stands earn him enemies but no contributions (whatever the status of his district) they will never follow his worthy example. The more explicit you can make the connection between your donation and the action that earned it, the better; hopefully that information will start being collected at a national level as well, to influence the voting and campaigning behavior of all politicians.
Only real progressives.
Democrats, for the most part, are Republicans. Let's face that, too. If you don't understand that, you've had too much of the Kool-Aid.
I donated $s, worked phone banks, registered new voters, I went out and knocked on doors...now I am waiting for some payback for my country. When I see real healthcare reform with a public obtion, strong regulation of Wallstreet, full withdrawl from Iraq, Gitmo actually closed, a new direction in Afganistan based on new information, and respect for our privacy rights, then I will be generous and fully on board again and all fired up!...otherwise, not so much. I will only consider donating through Act Blue unless I see actions that go with the progressive words.
Why this endless snub of Dean from the Dems? Everyone hates it when you are right I guess. We gave liberally when Dean headed the DNC. Now we don't give any money to anybody. Partially because we're out of money but mostly because they don't need our money. They seem to be happy enough to suck at the corporate teat. We fought long and hard - since Reagan! - to bring a populist force to Washington. Now that we've made it possible these guys will squander the opportunity.
When Howard Dean officially declares the DFA the new progressive Party for America We'll pony up the dollars again, till then, stew in your corporate juices you sell out gasbags.
From personal experience. Last year I gave every dime I made in advertising from my 'toon website in a six month period, to either the DNC, Barack,or Blue America.
It wasn't a fortune, a little over $500 bucks, but it hurt, and I was happy to do it.
I'm no longer happy. While it's a hell of a lot better than Old Fart & and Northern Bimbo, I am extremely disappointed in the Dems! All of them! They have laid down like whipped dogs,when they should be steamrollin'!
Pelosi, Reid, and Obama, three occupants of a Clown Car.
Fuck this bi-partisonSHIT, Go left old men and women, and I will open up the wallet. I'll still vote for them, but this cash calf has stopped giving!
Just not to the DNC, DSCC or DCCC except for targeted ads where you can see what your money is going to. Please continue to support people like Al Franken and Alan Grayson and anyone else who lives up to the ideals that we expect from the Democratic party. And when the DNC, DSCC and/or DCCC asks for money, return their form with a note that states what you want from them before you will give them anymore of your money. But also let them know that you are donating to people who walk the walk, and don't be afraid to name names.
..next to the Post article. For real.
http://www.gulfstream.com/itstime/index.cfm?u...
Shows you who their market demographic is.
I'm looking forward to the Republicans splitting into a religious wacko wing and a corporate toady wing. Then the Dems can split into their progressive wing, and the Blue Dogs can join the Republicans, where they belong.
Well, when the Republicans take back seats we'll know who to blame.
create a bill and call it Medicare for all. Let anyone who wants to buy into Medicare do so AT COST.
After they pass it, and Obama signs it into law, the DNC would be swamped with donations.
... I posted this on Huffpo the other day: and today...
It would be nice, not to have to pay my auto insurance for 10 year yet still be protected.
A great deal of our money resides on hard disk drives, not in the bank's vaults. The Fed aka Federal Reserve aka The Wizard Of OZ, don't you dare look behind the curtain!
Just make sure you set aside some lunch money, or get in line early. Look who stepped in when WAMU had that $16.4 billion dollar 10-day bank run on deposits. You can't be doing that because the money is not there. It's a shell game and it takes a couple days to put another shell in place.
By the way, The FDIC sold the banking subsidiaries (minus unsecured debt or equity claims) to JPMorgan Chase for $1.9 billion, which reopened the bank's offices the next day as JPMorgan Chase branches. They changed the name and installed new hard drives without blinking an eye. Remember that name... JPMorgan and the FED. And if you get confused with Morgan-Stanly, it's understandable.
Then I hear Mr. Grayson from FL today...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1h2c3Hkf7o
Listen carefully towards the end of the clip (JMC) AKA JPMorgan / Chase √
say exactly the opposite of what you are implying is happening, and you don't feel any shame for being this obtuse? Wow, I guess people can bend anything to fit their own narrative. Not that I disagree with the sentiment, I'd just rather stick to facts.
To quote the above article"
The vast majority of those declines were accounted for by the absence of large donors who, strategists say, have shut their checkbooks in part because Democrats have heightened their attacks on the conduct of major financial firms and set their sights on rewriting the laws that regulate their behavior.
So, do the posters here want to join the plutocrats in attacking the party?
I don't really see it as attacking the party.
When you stop and think about the BILLIONS of dollars spent to CONTROL the way these "elected" officials do their jobs...don't you get a bit angry?
Maybe it's just me.
I'm just waiting for the gutless "SCOTUS" decision concerning corporate financing of campaigns...and remembering a time when we could have had a chance at REAL campaign finance reform.
Oh well...the "elected" officials let that die also.
Obama has helped stabilize the economy--we no longer have to worry if our bank will be there next week. All sorts of public works are going on because of stimulus money. Obama has reached out to other countries and improved the image of the US enormously, including among Moslems. Obama is much more respected than Bush overseas. He got a law passed that secured equal pay for women. He increased money to colleges and to help students afford college. There is more help to veterans and their families to attend college. The EPA and the Justice Dept. and the FDA are now on the side of improving the lives of Americans.
I could go on--we may even get a strong health bill. I'm sure you can pick apart my assertions, but please think--how are we now compared with just one year ago? Is this really the time to stop supporting Democrats and give the country back to the Republicans?
As long as I am a second class citizen I will no longer donate one red cent.
But whatever $$ I have to give I give to my community. Maybe that's short sighted, but my neighbors are hurting.
Also, there's not a Dem within 100 miles of me in Congress that needs my money.
I'll vote for them, but people here need food and shelter.
Every time they call--and they call often--I tell the caller that I will not be giving one dime to the Democratic Party until there is a public option in the healthcare bill. They always go on with some song-and-dance about how they agree with me. I just politely tell them again--no public option, no money from me. Not now, not ever. If they don't want to listen to the majority of Americans--who they represent--then I won't be giving them my credit card number. Not now, not next year.
Login or Register to post comments.