The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired.
June 21, 2024
"Donors channeled tens of millions of dollars to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Republican National Committee immediately following his May 30 conviction..."
"... all but erasing the massive fundraising advantage that President Biden’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee once held.... The Biden campaign’s long-standing fundraising lead allowed his campaign to build a much larger footprint than Trump’s and to significantly outspend Trump’s effort on the airwaves.... But at the end of May, the Trump campaign and the RNC had a combined $171 million in cash on hand, surpassing the Biden campaign and the DNC’s combined total of $157 million, according to reports filed late Thursday."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
44 comments:
I blame the internet news like podcasts and YouTube’s killing the Propaganda MSM’s fake news naratives. Thanks Elon.
Holy carp! If only money bought elections the way Democrats conveniently claim it does…
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired."
Trying too hard got these people to where they are today. We'll see a double down, maybe two, before they begin to understand the point you are trying to make. Not that they could change. All this is invisible to them.
If they could, it's probably too late by the time they come around at all. Either Chuck or Rich will be by later to illustrate my point in detail.
Althouse wrote: "The Democrats tried to hard. It backfired."
Correction: "The Democrats have tried to cover up a zillion illegal dirty tricks since the Obama administration. Their continued doubling-down on anti-Trump aggression is destroying them, and ruining the USA's reputation at the same time."
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired. "
The democrats tried and continue to try and destroy what vestige of a just law-based society we once had. Turning this country into a TRUE bannana republic. Well the rules are clear now, win an election and put your next opponent and all of their supporters in jail as much as possible on trumped up witchhunts before the next election. Okay, let's get it on.
These communists that they are busy destroying everything.
Who was it that thought prosecuting your opponent on dozens of dubious charges via a clown show of judges and prosecutors was a good idea?
It couldn’t have been Joe. He’s barely sentient.
Did Dr. Jill approve.
I realized a long time ago that buying television ads for political campaigns has a rapidly reached point of diminished returns- actually turning into negative returns very quickly.
Neither of these candidates need television advertising since everyone already knows each of the candidates- the money is much better spent getting out the vote during the period October- January.
"Who was it that thought prosecuting your opponent on dozens of dubious charges via a clown show of judges and prosecutors was a good idea?"
The best and brightest thought this- Chuck, Rich, Lonejustice, Inga, Gadfly, etc. They still believe it and will believe it even if Trump were to win all 50 states in November. You can't argue with stupid people.
The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired.
===================
did the The Democrats stuff THE-BANANA in the wrong election wagon tailpipe?
but but but.... he paid a porn star to shut up - (Not illegal) and he dared to run against Hillary.
How dare he! Doesn't Trump understand that democrats are owed power?
( - even after being pimped by the Joe Scarbuough leftist media. circa 2016 )
They sacrificed what might have been a credible argument that they occupied moral high ground. There's no ad you can foist on people that can undo the damage, or so I hope. It is satisfying to see them fail.
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired."
It really has started to look like a Roadrunner cartoon. No matter how ingenious the scheme, and no matter how many times he tries, the Acme anvil keeps falling on the coyote.
"The Democrats tried too hard"
Too early to say. The taint still may sway some nice women, enough to make a difference in swing states.
“Who was it who thought (this) was a good idea …”
After a little though I’m going to answer my own question.
It was Soros (a convicted felon himself) and his ilk. They own the Democrat party now.
Tell me I’m wrong.
It is satisfying to see them fail.
Failure, or success, remains to be determined.
Democrats ran a corrupt scheme using our judicial system in a corrupt manner.
btw - Judge Merchan gets all of these cases. It's all corrupt.
Narayanan said...
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired.
===================
did the The Democrats stuff THE-BANANA in the wrong election wagon tailpipe?"
Still- ugh- trying- ugh- to get- ugh- the goddamn thing- ugh- out of the jar!
Failure, or success, remains to be determined
Yes. Can we now converse about the mechanisms for stealing the election or is that still considered ‘shitting on the blog’?
Was listening to the Megyn Kelly podcast yesterday. Not something I usually do, but she had an interview with a couple who were in the Nxvim cult and that caught my interest. When it ended the next podcast started and she had Bill Maher on. I listened until he pissed me off enough to turn it off. His big argument for electing Biden is that Trump denied the election and that it will be "the end of Democracy" if Trump wins. Cause if people start denying elections then its the end of peaceful transfer of power. Kelly didn't bring up all the attempts to get Trump during and after his presidency, including lawfare and the threat that poses to DEMOCRACY. Nor the need for elections to be seen as honest and fair by all parties and the fact that mail in ballots are prohibited in all western democracies except ours because they are so susceptible to fraud. And how throwing out election monitors while continuing to count ballots can undermine some silly peoples confidence in the integrity of the election. I wonder, could stuff like that undermine DEMOCRACY? Nah, only paranoid ultra-right maggats would think something like that.
Anyway, my take on Maher is that he is a useful idiot who is no longer useful. And he is frightfully uniformed. Which makes him perfect for hosting a left-leaning political talk show.
The outcome may be uncertain, but Democrat's lawfare is certainly doing a great job of tearing down the judicial system.
Since the Democrats have put all their money on a terrible candidate, the only option they feel that they have is to personally attack Trump.
There has been no point in the last 12 years that the democrats occupied any positive level of moral ground.
Biden campaign: We did it to him, we can do it to you.
Trump Donors: We know.
All the other Trump cases are imploding. The only successful one is really hard to explain beyond "claimed an NDA payout was a personal legal expense which is usually just a misdemeanor but for Trump it is a felony."
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired."
The Democrats showed their hand.
mindnumbrobot said...
“The outcome may be uncertain, but Democrat's lawfare is certainly doing a great job of tearing down the judicial system.”
Well, I remember a Democrat president who promised to “fundamentally transform” America.
They sacrificed what might have been a credible argument that they occupied moral high ground. There's no ad you can foist on people that can undo the damage, or so I hope. It is satisfying to see them fail.
I have been voting since Carter/Reagan and for the life of me, I can not recall a single time the Democrats held the moral high ground. They are consistently for whatever feels good (which includes whatever gives them more power) right now. Reasons to not do that be damned. Even on the few rare occasions they were for the right answer it was always for the wrong reasons. They long ago [if not from inception] swapped "feelz" and power for "morals" and never looked back.
"The Democrats tried too hard. It backfired."
Not the first backfire.
Channeling money sounds so much more nefarious than donating it.
Blogger Xmas said...
"All the other Trump cases are imploding."
That is not entirely correct. The Jack Smith J6 trial in DC is just paused waiting for the Supreme Court to tell them what immunity Trump has. Smith and Judge Tanya Chutkan will then be rushing that trial into action on whatever subset of the indictment they think they can get away with. Andrew McCarthy at NRO thinks they will be able to start the trial in September and have it running up through the election. That takes Trump off the campaign trail and puts news about the trial and replays of the J6 fake hearings the Democrats ran in 2021 on the front page every day in the last two months of the election. Smith will have no problem convincing Chutkan that the information the public will learn about Trump is sufficient enough reason to ignore the DOJ rule against trials in the 60 days before an election. And no DC jury will find Trump anything but guilty, guilty, guilty!
Furthermore, the Bragg case has yet to get to the sentencing phase. On July 11, expect Judge Juan Merchan to sentence Trump to a lengthy prison term. It will most likely be stayed pending appeal, but it will have an effect upon the uninformed voters.
So, yes, Professor Althouse and commenter Xmas, the Democrats lawfare has backfired in the sense that you describe, but the Democrats have just begun to fight. It may continue to backfire, which I hope, but there is no guarantee that it will.
the money is much better spent getting out the vote during the period October- January.
I see what you did there.
Recall that local Althouse commenter dolt LLR-democratical Rich proclaimed the New Soviet Democratical's "conviction" in their kangaroo court meant Trump would be unable to raise funds sufficient to remain competitive in the race while other lawfare efforts continued.
For those keeping track, this latest moronic "prediction" by a key member of the LLR-democratical Brigade of buffoons (Rich, Chuck, lonejustice) keeps the Correct Prediction Rate for Team LLR-democratical at around 0%.
On the "plus" side, there's nowhere to go but up!
Bragg's Soviet-worthy abuse of the legal system, and Biden's quiet acquiescence pissed me off so much I fired off $1,000 to the Trump campaign.
I'm 69. I have never before made a political donation.
I am in with Hey Skipper. I also sent off $1000 to Trump after that obscenity of a trial. And I have never before made a political donation to a presidental campaign.
The D.C. trial won't happen before the election- the appeal filed that SCOTUS took isn't the only one the Trump legal team has handy- they will file others as needed.
Not only is Trump getting a lot of donations he's killing it on social media, drawing crowds at his rallies, and winning over podcast hosts. The change since Ronna was ousted is 180 degrees. Note the Trump campaign is making a huge effort to get lawyers and poll watchers set up to minimize the margin of fraud. What remains to be seen is if he is smarter about his down ballot picks.
"Andrew McCarthy at NRO thinks they will be able to start the trial in September and have it running up through the election. "
---
McCarthy is, I'm sure, excited about that possibility. For him, his beloved DOJ can do no wrong. If they charged Trump with something then obviously he is guilty. Trump is just to icky to be in the White House. Trump is not even a lawyer! And to object to obvious election fraud, well 'We just don't do that". The GOPe, in their nice creased pants and appropriate law school degrees and club memberships, always takes the high road and accepts the beatings from the left. Always!
Der party faithful are gathering more into the fold, and their blood high, they eagerly--and impatiently--await the return of Der Fuhrer and the promised Fourth Reich to make their wretched little lives great...again!
cfs: McCarthy is, I'm sure, excited about that possibility. For him, his beloved DOJ can do no wrong. If they charged Trump with something then obviously he is guilty.
I regularly read McCarthy in NRO. While no fan of Trump, he is extremely critical of the DOJ, and all the lawfare being conducted against Trump.
I think the preference cascade is fully underway, and not just among the wealthy and powerful who even in their insulated positions are seeing the undeniable numbers.
Because of the dishonesty by both the media and the government, a whole lot of people seemed to believe that their economic struggles were just something they were going through, and many even felt some shame that everyone else was doing so well while they had to cancel vacations, postpone major purchases, and throttle everything back. There's just been a lot less money left at the end of the month. These are not the young people who are being absolutely crushed by the housing mess: they are middle-class families who have pre-inflation mortgages, but they are still getting bled dry by the massively inflated costs of everything they actually buy. They are essentially the "Reagan Democrats," even thought those were blue-collar and these people have what look like white-collar, office jobs but are now effectively "working-class" rather than "middle-class" thanks to the destruction of their purchasing power.
At some point this spring (my thought is that it was after the 3rd quarter sales figures came in and businesses could not deny reality because the money just wasn't there), just as the high-levels were concluding that nothing the administration is doing is working, and the normals realized that "Hey! It isn't just me! Everybody else is also just barely hanging on." Suddenly the happy-talk about "Bidenomics" and "The Biden Economy" shifted from potentially comforting to insulting.
These people aren't ideological. They might be uncomfortable with the extremist policies around crime, supporting creepy dudes in women's locker rooms, the out-there racial stuff, but (so far) those are things they haven't had to deal with personally (though the crime in particular is creeping closer and closer). But the economy is the worst it has been since the late '70s, and there is no reason to think that having the same people running things will make anything better at all.
People have decided that they need Change in order to get back their Hope, and Trump (Trump!) is their change-agent.
There has been almost a decade of crying wolf about Donald Trump. And no wolf has arrived. This reaction to the lstest doesn't surprise me at all.
democracy / least common denominator for winning strategy / high moral ground
can all three be possible?
Objectivity is the core to financial success, and formulating objective assessments will often put one in "dissent" from prevailing market assessments — much more often than one might think. In some formulations, the iconoclast scores the financial win. But one must remember this comes from a better reading of reality — and the opportunities it offers. It doesn't come from witch doctoring.
Roosevelt's New Deal reforms, particularly the SEC, put a plethora of audited financial and related information about listed companies out into the public commons. This was abundant and underutilized. Benjamin Graham and his acolytes like Warren Buffett in the value investor school sifted this information with metrics-based analysis and made fortunes on undervalued securities. As this universe of opportunity shrank, Buffett migrated to more sophisticated analyses but the man continues to be a fund of objectivity-based metrics.
But it is hard to believe that a love for objectivity-based metrics would lead one to Donald Trump. And it is hard to believe that Donald Trump is the keeper of some great secret truth that only the most perceptive can see. What else is going on?
The superrich — those whose wealth puts them at the commanding heights — have a homing instinct for reactionary politics and a visceral sense that money must be used to have the political power necessary to protect their position. This is accompanied by a sense of insecurity that if their power is not increasing it must surely be decreasing.
So what is reactionary politics? One might say these are policies that increase and concentrate wealth while at the same time constraining and containing egalitarian politics that would "spread wealth around." The plutocracy wants Washington regulation to support the economic concentration of private sector economic activity at the top.
Post a Comment