[T]he drop in donations coincides with an effort by DNC Chair Tom Perez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to rally support for the party. The two traveled the country on a "unity tour."The DNC raised $4.7 million in April. Meanwhile, the RNC raised $9.6 million in April. The RNC has $41 million cash on hand. and the DNC $8.8 million. But Trump's in trouble. Wait for those midterms. The Dems will flip the House and the Senate. That's what I read in the MSM.
May 23, 2017
"The Democratic National Committee reported its worst April of fundraising since 2009..."
"... according to Federal Election Commission records released Monday."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
70 comments:
GOP must run against:
Hack press
Hillary Clinton
And yet there is an article on "The Hill" this morning whose headline is:
"Is a Wave Election Forming for Democrats?"
Lede:
"Democrats are increasingly bullish about the prospect of a wave election in 2018 amid backlash against the passage of the House GOP’s ObamaCare replacement bill and the snowballing revelations coming out of the White House."
Sure.
The Democratic Party doesn't have any big idea to run with. That's their problem. Hard to raise money when you can't tell the donor what it's for.
My sense out here in flyover country is that the backlash isn't against Trump. November 2018 is still a long way off, so we'll see.
Hard to raise money when you can't tell the donor what it's for.
Especially if the donor suspects it might be for H>er.
The Democrats have a strategy to motivate the Rust Belt's under-employed workers to abandon Trump and switch their votes to the Democrat candidate in the 2020 election.
Their strategy is to advocate the establishment of sanctuary cities for illegal aliens.
And last week President Trump's 2020 campaign reported their best single day of fundraising ever:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-2020-campaign-claims-fundraising-175317119.html
$314m in mostly small donations.
Not bad for a campaign 3 years in the future.
John Henry
They don't need money. They get all the available press for free. If you wanted to buy 90% negative coverage for your political opponent, how would you even go about that?
The Democrats need more money to buy television advertisements arguing that Donald Trump won the 2016 election by collaborating with Vladimir Putin.
That collaboration deceived the dupes who voted for Trump. They should repent their deplorable gullibility by voting for the Democrats in future elections.
It's hard to run a protection racket when the people you are offering to "protect" know that you don't have the power to follow through on it would be a shame if something happened to it.
Especially if the donor suspects it might be for H>er.
Chelsea?
I admit that a Chelsea Clinton candidacy would be great blog fodder, and I'd probably make snarky comments.
Unless Hillary Clinton is now under the care of Oscar Goldman (played by Richard Anderson) and Dr. Rudy Wells, she is now, if you'll forgive me, herstory. It would help the Democratic Party if she would come out a state unequivocably that this is the case.
Pay attention to the congressional race here in Montana on Thursday, between a country-rock singer (D) with halfass name recognition in the state, a billionaire (R) from Pa who started a tech co in Bozeman and sold it to Oracle, oh and a Libertarian jagoff just for fun.
That should tell us something about flyover mood right now.
It could be that the potential donors are tapped out after bankrolling Jill Stein's recount effort.
The shift to hard left will be interesting to watch if it continues.
Perez is a nasty piece of work and Ellison is a hilarious black Muslim in drag.
When your party's rallying cry is (literally), "Fuck Trump!" then you have descended into mindless rage and not politics. The "retirement party" for John Burton here in California will be remembered much like the otherworldly "Wellstone Memorial" was for it's gross obtuseness and disgusting content.
"Democrats are increasingly bullish about the prospect of a wave election in 2018..."
As bullish as they were about the prospect of a 2016 presidential win, I reckon.
91% chance of flipping both the House and Senate. The model says so.
This is what I hate about the current media environment. The press has gone insane. I don't think Trump is doing well, but it's hard to tell because the media will never report that Trump is doing well. The WaPo publishes a thing called The Daily 202 that is an attack sheet against Trump. It's like a little special edition of reasons to hate Trump, and it comes out every day, emailed to millions of people.
In this environment, the fact that Trump still has an approval rating of 40% is a miracle.
Here's How Bernie Can Still Win
You mean to tell me the Dems new potty mouth strategy isn't convincing people that they're just plain folks?
The WaPo is the DNC's official news outlet.
Run against it, GOP.
April is the cruelest month
In addition:NRCC announces record breaking first quarter fundraising.
"Pay attention to the congressional race here in Montana on Thursday, between a country-rock singer (D) with halfass name recognition in the state, a billionaire (R) from Pa who started a tech co in Bozeman and sold it to Oracle, oh and a Libertarian jagoff just for fun."
You forgot to mention that the nude country-rock singer is also more of a socialist than a Democratic.
The Dems may actually flip this seat - I am seeing a lot more of his signs this time than I ever saw Crooked Hillary signs last fall. Esp in Missoula where we spent the night last week. We even have one in town here, a couple hours west of there, where any open support for Clinton would have likely resulted in, at a minimum, public shaming, and, possibly even tar and feathering.
We get both Missoula and Kalispell channels here on Dish, and ads for both candidates are being run pretty heavily, though my gut feeling is that the GOP candidate probably has the edge there. And he is completely dominating on the Internet advertising I am seeing - over at Instapundit, I am seeing little else of anything. Which is worrisome because it means that they are blowing money needlessly. Or that they have a lot more to spend. They also seem to have a broader variety of TV ads. But not nearly as many yard signs. It should be interesting to see what happens Thurs.
Which means that I have to get my partner down to the courthouse by then. I picked up my ballot when I renewed the registration for my truck plates last week, but they want to see her in person (with ID) for hers.
Redistributive change is in short supply since changing of the guard in the DC swamp. Perhaps this will place unPlanned Americans, displaced Americans, disenfranchised Americans before their replacements of globalist ambitions and refugees of elective wars.
Echo chambers are where a lot Democrats are residing these days.
Small donations are almost always drawn by actual candidates, not parties. Parties bring in donations in big chunks. I suspect the insanity reflected by the media is giving pause to those who write big checks. I know that even if I were a deep-pocketed Democrat, I would be very hesitant to write a check to those now in charge of the DNC- I would definitely wait and spend the money on level-headed Democrat candidates, and those haven't yet revealed themselves.
The Democrats are in more danger in 2018 than they realize because a lot of the DNC seed money is going to get used backing the more insane candidates for flipping seats- that is the problem with Tom Perez, Keith Ellison, and others at the DNC.
"91% chance of flipping both the House and Senate. The model says so."
I can see the House flipping, and really, really don't want to see Pelosi again with the Speakership. But the Senate? In their wildest dreams, given how many Red/Trump state seats they are defending. To flip the Senate would require running the table on all those races, plus winning 3 more seats, beating incumbent GOP Senators in Red states. With, mostly candidates with little name recognition against Trump flying into those states on AF1 for his mega rallies. Ryan and the Republicans in the House should be starting to panic, and start buckling down passing Obamacare replacement, corporate tax reform, and a real budget, instead on continuing to pass continuing resolutions that continue to enshrine Pelosi's priorities from the last time she had the Speaker's gavel.
Mike Sylwester said...
That collaboration deceived the dupes who voted for Trump. They should repent their deplorable gullibility by voting for the Democrats in future elections.
I'll get right on that.
Bruce Hayden said...
You forgot to mention that the nude country-rock singer is also more of a socialist than a Democratic.
No pictures, please.
The Clintons are or at least were supposed to be the big bwanas in raising money for Democrat--or at least for Clinton campaigns. And now that Hillary has been routed for the second time, the Clinton criminal clan may be switching its hopes to Chelsea.
Well I saw Chelsea on one of the cable public affairs channels last night. Her performance was dreadful--speaking at a panel about women and children and her new (ghost written) book. It's said that politics are Hollywood for ugly people. Well let's just say that Chelsea is halfway to qualifying on that point. And as for her speaking ability? Sheesh. I've seen 60 year old women generate more excitement reading a grocery list.
If Chelsea Clinton is the future of the Democrat party (replacing the geriatric set in charge now) the Dems are in for a long hard cold future.
As for the MSM dreams of the House flipping? Could happen, but probably not. And the Senate most assuredly will not flip. On the other hand the MSM might succeed in driving Trump from the White House. A coup by newspaper would only serve to make the NYT and WaPo and the MSNBC, CNN cabal more insufferable.
Remember how well a huge financial advantage worked out for HRC in the last election? Oh, right. I guess maybe it's about more than that. Not saying the Dems will do well (certainly won't unless they get some candidates that don't make people want to set things on fire), but if there's one lesson from the last election, it's that money matters waaaaay less than it used to.
Well, they did such a good job with all that money in 2016. Not surprised some people aren't interested in giving them more.
Once Hillary performs the forbidden ceremony to install her black soul in Chelsea's younger body the Democrats will be back on track for 2020. Chelsea's soul will be annihilated but that's a small price to pay for immortality.
I'm getting to the point where I hope the MSM is never on my side.
They constantly lull the Dems into a false sense of winning.
It's like the Althouse rule on studies involving the difference between men and women. The results always need to be spun as a good thing for women.
This is how the media spins the news. No matter what happens, it's a good thing for Dems. Or it's a bad thing for Reps.
Take for example a recent headline saying Trump tried to get his intelligence officials to say there was no collusion. This comes off as a bad things. But one tweeter rewrote the headline, "Trump asks his intelligence officials to tell the truth."
Doesn't seem so bad when you put it that way.
If it were Obama, that's how the headline, if there was one, would have been written.
"The Dems will flip the House and the Senate. That's what I read in the MSM. "
https://www.google.com/search?q=wishful+thinking+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Wishful thinking is the formation of beliefs and making decisions according to what might be pleasing to imagine instead of by appealing to evidence, rationality, or reality. It is a product of resolving conflicts between belief and desire.
"It would help the Democratic Party if she would come out a state unequivocably that this is the case."
Which is exactly why she won't. It's plausible that she harbors dreams of the Party begging her to return and lead them; those dreams may not be altogether implausible, either.
I can't see where the Democrats have so many pickups. The districts where they are strong they already have. Where they are weak they aren't offering anything to convince the voters they are any better than they have been for the last seven years. Obviously some districts will be lost to the Republicans due to changes in the district but it is doubtful there will be that many districts affected. Trump could force the issue by simply removing the waivers on Obamacare. That will remind all voters just what a disaster the Democrats truly are. The Democrat-Communists in the California Legislature are proposing a State Single Payer. The estimated costs are about $10,000 per capita except there isn't a head tax of $10,000 proposed to pay for it. After taking in all of the current funding for health care in CA they would short at least $150bn which is about $8,000 per resident in CA of the population that currently pays the bulk of the taxes in CA. It is these kinds of proposals that the Democrats are running on, Left and more Left and these proposals aren't the kind of proposals that voters who kept electing a Republican majority Congress are going to be likely to vote for.
Kudos to MADISONMAN! Having just read all 4 books by Martin Caidin, I agree with you 100%.
At least new legs, a new arm and a new eye would help her navigate stairs.
The Democrats have one platform: whatever Trump does, they're opposed. If the Lord God Jehovah showed up on the front lawn of the White House (which would surprise the Hell out of me, an atheist!) and Trump cut a deal with him (her?) for perfect weather, an end to global hunger, and a thousand years of world peace, Democrats would reflexively oppose the deal ("Benefits the Rich" would be the headline in the Times!). Now it's true that Republicans in the House and Senate are doing their dead level best to make themselves irrelevant, but whether "F**k Trump" is a reason to vote for any Democrat, well that's doesn't seem like a reasonable proposition.
Maybe Democrats learned from the 2016 election that raising more money doesn't win the close races, that what they need are candidates who are willing to self-finance.
"what they need are candidates under 65."
FIFY
Trump is a dumpster fire. But anyone who thinks the Democrats are going to clean up in the next election has yet to grok just how incompetent and out of touch the Party has become. They think they're going to win an election by driving away pro-lifers, pushing single payer and screaming blue murder about everything Trump does. Good luck with that.
I'm having trouble parsing this against all the claims that anti-Trump entertainers such as Colbert, MSNBC and the NYT and WaPo have seen surges in viewers/readers, which I am further told is attributable to support for the #Resistance.
But the Dems are starving for money and the GOP is flush?
Something is out of whack. I wonder if the Colbert/MCNBC/NYT/WaPo et al figures are being spun? No direct evidence of that... but something isn't right.
The MSM channeling Goebbel's "big lie."
Maybe they are out of money after giving to the "recount", Planned Parenthood, PBS, and the environmentalists trying to save the baby bears.
"Blogger eric said...
I'm getting to the point where I hope the MSM is never on my side. They constantly lull the Dems into a false sense of winning."
This is why I stopped watching Fox News after Romney lost. I was under the impression he could win because I had insulated myself with too much positive spin. I switched to CNN and this last election was a treat!
The Democrats could be in serious trouble in 2018. Realistically, all the Republicans and Trump have to do is what was promised, during the last election. Deal with healthcare, the border, and the tax code, and people will vote for you. Now, contrast that with, what is now the face of the Democrats. All the time they're out there harping in Trump and yelling impeachment, the faces the people are Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, Elijah Cummings, and Tom Perez. Now, think about that for just a moment, not only do the Democrats not have any ideas, but the people they trot out to message it I, personally, wouldn't trust with my spare change.
I think the DNC's fundraising would improve if they just curse and caper more maniacally than they are doing now. Really go to the edge to show their constituency how dement..err...dedicated they are.
Realistically, all the Republicans and Trump have to do is what was promised, during the last election. Deal with healthcare, the border, and the tax code,
That is exactly what worries me, It's not about Trump, it's about whether the GOP Congress really will do these things.
I wish I was more confident.
Obviously some districts will be lost to the Republicans due to changes in the district but it is doubtful there will be that many districts affected.
Democrats are so desperate for a favorable leading indicator (having failed in special elections so far) that they are glomming onto Macron's win...in France...for re-assurance.
Democrats need more shouty old white women as the Face of Their Party.
That'll open up the fence-sitters wallets, if if doesn't remind them of their ex-wives first.
Pay attention to the congressional race here in Montana on Thursday
We've seen this movie before. It will mean the beginning of the end of Trump if the D wins. Otherwise it will quickly be forgotten as meaningless given the larger narrative pedaled by the media.
91% chance of flipping both the House and Senate. The model says so.
I remember that model, it said Trump has no chance to become President. Any Dems looking to "the model" for validation of a coming apocalypse really need to step outside and ask the first random stranger to slap them across the face as hard as they can.
It would help the Democratic Party if she would come out a state unequivocably that this is the case.
How long until Barack let's it slip that he just can't see her running again? Wouldn't that essentially foreclose any possibility without her having to say anything?
I mean, what's she going to do to him? Tell everyone where he was during Benghazi?
Kevin, there was an initial story that he was napping so he would be well rested for a big fund raising event the next day. I'm sure he read all about it in the paper.
My personal belief - based on gut feelings only - is that the Clintons are leveraging themselves to pick the next candidate. It won't be Chelsea. Even they cannot be so dotingly blind as to not see how horrible she is as any kind of politician. And it will have to be someone that is acceptable to the Bernie faction = which is still deeply pissed at the Dem Party. Also someone the Clintons can manipulate.
I also think there is going to be a huge battle between the Clinton, Sanders, and Obama factions for control of the party. Sanders will be the first causality and will either join one of the others, or simply fade from the public.
The Dem leadership would make an AARP executive board meeting look sprite!
Pelosi, age 77
Bernie, age 75
Biden, age 74
Hillary,age 69
Schumer, age 66 (the young'un)
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, 84
Steven Breyer, 78
These old dinosaurs are not held in high esteem by the Dem youths (except for Bernie, and maybe Ginsberg). The Dem youths believe that the old-timers have gobbled up all the riches, leaving them with a lotta school debt, no chance to buy a house, and a bleak future.
How to blame GOP for all this. That dog won't hunt.
What good is raising the minimum wage to $15/hour, when Burger King goes fully automatic?
The Left would be a joke, if they weren't so dangerous and damaging to the Country.
Kevin, she might also let everyone know Obama knew about her secret server or even gave tacit approval.
The issue right now is whether there is anything to the Seth Rich story.
I honestly don't know but Instapundit linked to one of those articles.
I also think there is going to be a huge battle between the Clinton, Sanders, and Obama factions for control of the party. Sanders will be the first causality and will either join one of the others, or simply fade from the public.
Wouldn't the first battle be to see which one can get Sanders and his people in their corner, thus denying them to the other?
Kevin, she might also let everyone know Obama knew about her secret server or even gave tacit approval.
The statute of limitations is not over, and she can still be prosecuted for those crimes until it is. I don't think she's going to open with that one, which may hurt her more than Obama.
Just the idea that she might have to testify under oath, which she avoided under Comey, would be enough to dissuade her from that line of attack.
furious_a said...
Obviously some districts will be lost to the Republicans due to changes in the district but it is doubtful there will be that many districts affected.
Democrats are so desperate for a favorable leading indicator (having failed in special elections so far) that they are glomming onto Macron's win...in France...for re-assurance."
The Democrats would like the US to be more like France, much more Left as the center but we are not. Macron almost had to screw up royally to lose in a country that pretty Left by our standards whose opposition candidate was a fascist. So essentially Le Pen's position in economic terms wasn't that far apart from Macron's. So that wasn't a point of contention. Socially fascism still has a stink in Europe (deservedly so) but lets be mindful that Len Pen did win a surprisingly large share of the vote for someone of her political ideology. The National Front is slowly increasing it's support among the native French. More EU high handedness coupled with more Muslim terrorism and immigrant crime will in time change the mindset of the French.
The Democrats would be more realistic in looking at the UK and who the June elections turnout. I maybe wrong but I don't see the Labor party doing all that well and that is in a country whose middle is more Left than ours while the Democrats think even further left is a good idea.
Michael K said...
The issue right now is whether there is anything to the Seth Rich story.
I honestly don't know but Instapundit linked to one of those articles."
Rich is probably the leaker but whether or not his murder is related to the leak is something else. It looks suspicious, a presumed robbery murder where nothing appears to have been robbed from the victim but then again criminals are usually pretty stupid so the killer could have simply done it and split fearing he may have been seen. All the same, there is far more credible appearance of collusion in the leak and murder relation than any of these Russian allegations. For all of the hysteria on the Left, even if the Russians hacked the Clinton server and the DNC servers and leaked out the emails with the collusion of the Trump campaign, what are they saying? If their sleaze and criminality wasn't exposed they would have won? I don't think that is going to be a vote winner for them.
Rich is probably the leaker but whether or not his murder is related to the leak is something else.
I find the murder the least interesting part of the whole thing, as it's not really relevant to the real issue - did the Russians hack the DNC servers, or did Seth Rich give the information to Wikileaks?
If Seth Rich did it, the "Russians hacked the election" narrative implodes. The Russians may have talked with Flynn and Manafort, but they didn't change any votes and they didn't release any documents. It would be very difficult for the average voter to then understand what the Russians did to influence anything, let alone believe they did something which rose to the level of "hacked".
And the media, having pursued this relentlessly every day since the election, looks foolish for pushing the investigation of Trump while failing to also push the investigation of Rich.
My guess is that Mueller's investigation will focus on what the evidence can prove about the Russians (not much) and will leave well alone the Seth Rich angle, lest the Special Counsel prove his mission was based on a lie.
The missing link in the Seth Rich case is his laptop.
Who has it ?
I maybe wrong but I don't see the Labor party doing all that well
The betting odds on Labour are 8 to 1 against, down from 10 to 1, but that was before the Manchester atrocity.
They don't need money when they are a lead pipe cinch to never lose another election.
Kevin said...
Rich is probably the leaker but whether or not his murder is related to the leak is something else.
I find the murder the least interesting part of the whole thing, as it's not really relevant to the real issue - did the Russians hack the DNC servers, or did Seth Rich give the information to Wikileaks?
If Seth Rich did it, the "Russians hacked the election" narrative implodes. The Russians may have talked with Flynn and Manafort, but they didn't change any votes and they didn't release any documents. It would be very difficult for the average voter to then understand what the Russians did to influence anything, let alone believe they did something which rose to the level of "hacked".
And the media, having pursued this relentlessly every day since the election, looks foolish for pushing the investigation of Trump while failing to also push the investigation of Rich.
My guess is that Mueller's investigation will focus on what the evidence can prove about the Russians (not much) and will leave well alone the Seth Rich angle, lest the Special Counsel prove his mission was based on a lie."
The term hacked is bandied about as if it actually has meaning. And what is the meaning? The Russians tampered with the voting machines? No evidence of that. The Russians faked a good portion of the Clinton and DNC emails? No evidence of that. The Russians released to emails to Wikileaks with the approval of the Trump campaign? No evidence of that and even if it were true there still is no crime to prosecute. Unless the crime is exposing Democrat sleaze and criminality. The hysterics on the left willingly blind themselves to the real criminal acts, Clinton's numerous felonies related to having a private email server such as violations of the various Federal record keeping statutes, Freedom of Information Act, obstruction of justice and violations of national security laws. Obama is complicit as well as he was aware of this and let it continue. Cpmey himself doesn't look to healthy if Mueller is an honest prosecutor since Comey violated a number of FBI procedures and his acts can construed as an obstruction of justice. Then there is the spying on US citizens in the US with phony pretext to do so and the unmasking of them. If we actually had an incorruptible special prosecutor who wasn't limited with fake parameters you could fill a section of a federal penitentiary with VIP Democrats.
Michael K said...
The missing link in the Seth Rich case is his laptop.
Who has it ?
Who had it. It has been melted down by now.
It was a robbery though not just a murder. The Deep State stole the laptop.
I agree. The laptop was the point of the robbery.
I find it interesting that so many people assume that if Rich wasn't the wikileaks source, then his murder can't have been related. Sure it could. Motive only requires that someone *thought* he was or might be the leak, whether he actually was is secondary.
[!] Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: BLOCKQUOTE
<blockquote>Realistically, all the Republicans and Trump have to do is what was promised, during the last election.
--bflat879</blockquote>
Trump made many contradictory promises on the campaign trail. Realistically, you're too far in the tank for Trump if you expect the Republican legislators in the Congress are able by some act of Congress to make good on Trump's promises.
"If Chelsea Clinton is the future of the Democrat party (replacing the geriatric set in charge now) the Dems are in for a long hard cold future."
Chelsea may find a seat opened in a really safe (for D's) district that she will tumble into. While hope springs eternal in her parent's breasts for her ascent into greatness, she will linger and fade there. Soon she will be a name in name alone just as the younger Kennedy children have become.
The missing link in the Seth Rich case is his laptop.
Who has it ?
And what kind of hammer is she hitting it with?
Wave for Dems; Hillary in a landslide; if you want your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Fake news = wishful thinking.
Post a Comment