DNC deep in debt as RNC builds up $20 million war chest

[n2doc]

The Republican National Committee keeps building its cash advantage over its Democratic rivals, strengthening the party’s position going into the election year – with the latest monthly reports showing the DNC with a major debt, while the RNC has accrued a $20M war chest.

The Republicans announced last week that they had raised $8.7 million in October, which they say broke a record for presidential off-year fundraising record.

“With just under a year until Election Day 2016 we’re seeing great enthusiasm for the GOP,” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a press release.

Figures show the Republicans now have over $20 million cash on hand, with only $1.8 million in debts owed. The RNC has raised a total of $89.3 million to date in the current election cycle.

The figures stand in stark contrast to the DNC, that has only $4.7 million cash in hand, with $6.9 million in debts owed, putting the DNC in the red, according to FEC figures. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Democrats have so far raised $53.2 million this election cycle, significantly less than their Republican counterparts.

more
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/26/dnc-deep-in-debt-as-rnc-builds-war-chest.html?intcmp=hpbt3

[PatrickforO]

1. I see this as being the fruits of Third Way-ism and the gross negligence of DWS.

Neither of which is very appealing to the thinking progressive. I quite giving the DNC money about a year ago because I'm really, really tired of holding my nose and voting for the lesser of evils. I'm sick of this shit.

[SusanCalvin]

3. Really.

Supposedly she's there because of her prowess as a fundraiser? Hollow laugh.

All they've gotten from me in a long time is nastygrams in their postage-paid envelope.

[840high]

30. me 2

[FreakinDJ]

8. An Army of Young Voters would help

but they are not that gullible these days

[SusanCalvin]

11. Hopefully they're helping Bernie.

I know a lot of young people, and they're all for him. Just needs to be channeled.

[FreakinDJ]

13. Contagious like an epidemic

The DNC has a choice ...

Insignificance beyond political effectiveness or actually REPRESENT their constituency

[SusanCalvin]

15. Huh? nt

[FreakinDJ]

17. on edit

The DNC has a choice ...

Insignificance beyond political effectiveness or actually REPRESENTING their constituency

This ramming down the throat of their 3rd Way candidate will be their and our undoing but the political calculated "Hold your nose and vote" tactic isn't working out so well for them

[SusanCalvin]

18. It doesn't seem to be at this time. Good. nt

[NobodyHere]

35. The polls are showing that most democrats support Hilary

Should the DNC shove a candidate with 30% support down the throats of democratic voters?

[artislife]

37. But then why aren't they sending in the money like the repubs?

I think it is because for what it is worth, the repubs are giving their people who are not tap dancers. I mean, it is very very clear where the candidates stand. The repubs know that the candidates will not cave.

We don't know how far ours will compromise.

[NobodyHere]

39. If you ever listen to Republicans speak

They believe their candidates collapse just as much as we do. For example many republicans wanted a government shutdown over Obamacare.


Otherwise I can't really answer why people aren't sending in enough money.

[artislife]

40. I think they have a wing that thinks so

just like we, the left, think the dems are spineless.

I don't listen to talk radio anymore and have no cable. Reading and clips is how I get the news.

[jwirr]

52. Maybe it is the progressives who usually support candidates

when the DNC used to allow we the people to elect our own candidates.

BTW she is ahead in national polls with are very unreliable and in states where Bernie has not even started working in. That means that it is name recognition you are talking about.

Give Bernie time and I think things will be different. When they know what he is about they love him.

[mythology]

24. The "thinking progressive" apparently doesn't realize that the parties are more polarized that ever

There is no grand effort to make the party more like Republicans that Sanders is going to save you from. This is something that can be objectively measured and you are factually incorrect.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/12/7-things-to-know-about-polarization-in-america/

It astounds me that people still cling to the obviously incorrect idea that the parties are the same and at the same time have the arrogance to imply that everybody else isn't thinking.

[PatrickforO]

34. Sorry, but I did not say that the parties are the same. Kindly do not put words

into my mouth.

OK, let's do a picture:

Since the US is dominated by a two party system, there is a continuum of political positions that in 1960 looked like this:

New Deal Dems********JFK***********IKE****************Goldwater******Bircher/KKK

In the election of 1964, Goldwater got trounced by LBJ. This effectively neutralized the power the conservative section of the GOP had. Then in the 1970s things began to change. In 1971, Powell wrote his evil memo. Neoliberal capitalism ala the Chicago School Hayak/Friedman group started getting a wider audience in the United States and the UK. In 1981, when Reagan slithered into the White House, he shortly killed the Fairness Doctrine (1984) and began busting unions.

The Dems were losing seats, and it seemed to people in the party establishment that the party needed a different way, a Third Way - socially more liberal than the GOP but espousing neoliberal economic positions. Clinton was elected on this platform.

In the meantime, back in Reagan's presidency, and certainly in HW Bush's, the crazy right felt betrayed. Oh, the GOP courted them. Oh, we don't like abortion, they said. And so they went out and voted, but then nothing happened. So, all these Birchers and crazy 'christians' started organizing at the grass roots level. They began taking over school boards, county and municipal elected positions. Then Obama was elected, and the Koch brothers, for grins, giggles and lots more profits, got all those Birchers together, old and new, and funded the rise of the Tea Party.

So you saw what happened - how the TP gained a bunch of seats in 2010 and took over the House in 2014. So now...

Here's how that continuum looks in 2015:

New Deal Dem***Bernie*********DNC/Clinton*********Establishment GOP******Trump***Fascist/KKK

OK, now with that background painted, I am to the left on this American continuum. I'm a social democrat and would love to see us adopt policies that have worked in northern Europe. I've never seen why we cannot use OUR tax dollars to make OUR government OF, BY and FOR US, the people implement policies and programs that benefit us. And I don't see why helping others is an extreme political position.

Clinton is much further right than Sanders in terms of 'free trade,' 'all of the above energy,' and certainly as regards war and national security. She is a Third Way Democrat. She and her husband are quite beholden, much more beholden to Wall Street than Sanders is.

Now, if establishment Republicans like Bush or Rubio get in, they will basically gut the New Deal, privatize Social Security, finish busting unions, and ratify TPP which will, within a decade end the United States as we know it in favor of corporate rule (read the text of it if you don't believe me). And if Trump is the nominee, we can look forward to a hyper-nationalist sprint toward genocide, concentration camps and war. So of COURSE I'll vote for Clinton if Sanders doesn't make it. She is much further right than me, but she is at least sane.

However, I am supporting Bernie because it seems like for those of us who believe as I do, and there are many of us, the Democratic Party has deserted us, moved to the right. So now, after this LONG, EXHAUSTIVE explanation that you probably won't bother to read all the way through, perhaps you understand that...

No....the parties are NOT the same - the GOP is nearly a fascist party, and the Dems are just a bit right to the Eisenhower Republicans. I am a New Deal Democrat. Get the picture???

[artislife]

38. Great post

Thank you for taking the time to spell it out and give a nod to the history surrounding the shift.

[Straw Man]

46. Interesting and mostly convincing ...

... but do you really think that New Deal Dems are as far left as it gets in America?

[PatrickforO]

47. No, but I'm not a 'purist' Socialist. The problem I think with such a pure position is

that many of the purists have wound up not voting for anyone, ever - a sort of voluntary disenfranchisement. The fallacy is they feel that if the person running is not pure enough ideologically, then they won't bother. This means, of course, that they are waiting for a revolution that isn't going to come. Much like Linus waiting each year for the Great Pumpkin.

And of course there is the small communist party.

The Wobblies are still around. 'The interests of management and of labor have nothing in common.' They are right in a sense, too. Unions have lost way too much power, especially under the neoliberal regime. There's a decent book called 'The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism' that talks about the economic movements that brought our current so-called 'free market' into place.

But no, Straw Man, I would be very happy with single payer heathcare where I didn't have to worry about it, and it wasn't tied to employment. Stong social security system. Heavily subsidized childcare and postsecondary education. And a fairer tax system so these big corporations and billionaires pay their fair share. Basically I want my tax money to go mostly for programs that help Americans have better and less stressful lives.

Because right now, for about half of us, life is a tightrope, and for about a fourth of us it is a living hell. That should not be.

If the billionaires could just toss us a few bones such as those I mentioned, they could continue in peace for many years. Leave things as they are and we're maybe 10 to 20 years away from real revolution since what we have presently is unsustainable.

[Straw Man]

56. Fair enough.

I can agree with all of that. I just feel that the KKK and neo-Nazis are as far off the charts on the right as the communists and Wobblies are on the left. They're waiting for their own revolution.

I agree that we are flirting with real revolution, as we were in the Gilded Age. The question remains whether meaningful reform will come to bleed off the pressure before the whole thing blows.

[Floyd Steinberg]

2. I wonder how deep DNC will have to go before

they fire the worthless leadership team?

[SusanCalvin]

4. Until we lose again? nt

[DonCoquixote]

5. Losing is a feature, not a flaw

Honestly, if DWS is not a GOP plant, she should be paid the same, for her incompetence has handed congress to the GOP. Rince Prebus WISHES he was as responsible for GOP success as DWS was.

[Funtatlaguy]

7. DWS is feckless, listless, horrendous.

Even Rinsed Penis is a better Chairman.
And, that's saying something.

[PatrickforO]

48. Hmm.

Wonder if he does rinse...

That's really funny.

[LiberalArkie]

6. Not even then, they seem to be accomplishing their goals quite well. HRC has her

war chest and so what it there is nothing to help the downstream Democrats. If Bernie wins the nomination, "Well we are sorry Mr Sanders, but we really don't have the money for a viable campaign. Win Win..

[SusanCalvin]

10. And it's the downstream Democrats who really count.

ALEC's even been involved in our local school board elections.

[LiberalArkie]

16. But it all depends on who they count for really. Boomers are getting ready to cash in

and drop out I think and leave it to the millennials.

[SusanCalvin]

19. NOT THIS BOOMER! nt

[LiberalElite]

22. NOT THIS ONE OR HER FRIENDS EITHER! nt

[tibbir]

29. Not this one boomer either!

[DonCoquixote]

28. you think they care about the milennials?

Hell, some of them think Obama is too young. Expect a bunch of 90 year olds who will run over anyone, from 90 year old true hippies to the very babies in the crib, just to get one more year in power and one more toy

[Le Taz Hot]

41. Nope.

I'll quit my activism when I die.

[TheBlackAdder]

31. As long as DWS is there, they get NOTHING from me. nt

[closeupready]

33. +1. Me too.

I said so, politely, in other words, responding to a recent appeal for money from them, declining to give them anything.

It pains me to admit that because I would actually like to give to an effective DNC, but this one with DWS running it is so NOT effective, that it's simply throwing good money after bad.

[hollysmom]

9. I stopped giving to the DNC because

they have never supported any candidates in my area. thanks so much. I give my money directly to the candidates I support. Someone has to support them.

[SusanCalvin]

12. They didn't waste any time dumping the 50-state strategy.

And President Obama didn't waste any time dumping OFA.

[tblue37]

14. DWS has alienated the few Dems who weren't already alienated by the DNC's determination

to block liberal candidates and push forward DINOs, many of whom were Republicans five minutes prior to becoming the DNC-supported candidate in this that or the other race.

[Vincardog]

20. Bingo Republicans DINOs pushed by other DINOS

[OutNow]

21. I give my money directly to my representative - Peter DeFazio (D - Oregon)

and if he raises more money than needed to defeat any Repub foolish or crazy enough to run against him he can spread it around to like-minded progressives.

The DNC doesn't deserve any of my money.

[lpbk2713]

23. They can do a lot of Swift boating with that kind of money.

And I'm sure they know it too.

[ibegurpard]

25. all the nonstop sky is falling emails

Followed by the electoral disaster last cycle didn't help. I contribute directly to candidates here and to my state Democratic Party organizations. The national party will get nothing from me with its current leadership and ineptness.

[Turn CO Blue]

26. And yet we are always told how DWS is the BEST fundraiser ever, justifying her long tenure.

She serves at the pleasure of the President. Time to start pressuring Obama to whisper in her ear that she suddenly has a need to spend more time with family - so that we can get somebody in there who knows how to run a modern GOTV campaign and raise the energy levels to raise some funds.

[Thinkingabout]

27. It may be a good idea for DNC candidates to get some fund raisers going.

[msongs]

32. 7 years of party decline. top brass has not done its job of party building nt

[NobodyHere]

36. Handing money to the RNC or DNC is a waste anyways

Give directly to candidates.

[SadWingsOfDestiny]

42. DNC is within it's chosen destiny.

There was a time when labor unions filled the coffers and walked the streets for the Democratic Party.

Then the anti labor movement, even within the Democratic party, gained increasing influence.

Rather than work to strengthen labor, to help restore it to what it once was, the Democratic Party capitulated to the GOP Southern Strategy. Right to Work, Davis/Bacon were not actively opposed or even argued against. The New Deal became an antiquated bargaining chip, regardless of current popularity. No representative voice within K street to stop the degradation.

For the Democratic Party, a new source of funding was sought out. That would be the same wealthy forces that influence the Republicans.

In Summary, the Democratic Party will not, can not, be what it once was until labor unions become what they once were. For the Democratic Party to represent the working man again, it must be coopted by labor again. We are looking at decades of hard work for this to come to fruition. In the meantime, the Party will work for social justice with disregard for economic justice.

I don't think the Democratic Party will ever again be the party that we once knew. I believe, that in the end, after much pain and suffering, and far into the future, a labor Party will arise to represent the working man.

[NBachers]

43. Thanks for your true and thoughtful post, and welcome to Democratic Underground.

[FreakinDJ]

45. The $15 per hr Living Wage movement is the Labor Unions

There are unions backing those brave people

So to say there is not a resurgence in labor is not being fully truthful. Its just that the DNC doesn't wish to recognize it and HRC would minimize their efforts

[SadWingsOfDestiny]

50. I appreciate your zeal

But to be brutally honest, labor unions, in general, are a mere shadow of what they once were. The 1950s is the decade we should attempt to replicate with respect to organized labor.

What strikes me as most ironic is how the working class conservative retro dream so severely misses their desired mark. They wish to live within a "Leave it to Beaver era", union influenced, living standard by implementing industrial age ideology. They want to live in June Cleaver's world by reliving the labor struggles at the turn of the 20th century before their vision may be realized.


Labor unions are so much more than negotiators for wage and benefits. They are representation in Washington DC to counter the corporate lobby. Without them, the working man has no counter to the dominant corporate voice on K street, influencing all legislation.

Want to know why you feel betrayed by the impending enactment of TPP? It is because there was negligible union representation throughout the process, including the drafting of the documents, as well as the influence upon our representatives to act in our best interest.

[jwirr]

54. Whenever I hear anyone talk down the Union I asked them

who they think is going to speak for us? I have never belonged to a Union because a mother taking care of a disabled child 24/7 has no Union.

But I was smart enough to know that most of the social programs that helped me take care of that child - and later adult - came through the strength of the Union.

And the Union members are very aware of that. When Christmas came around the Union was there to help me. My Christmas tree always came from the railroad workers from alongside the tracks and there was always a box of food and gifts for my children. And one of my Union neighbors made sure that there was always a $100 bill tucked in the box.

I will always side with the Union rank and file. I only wish that I could join them. We need a voice as large as the corporate world.

[IDemo]

49. I will take exception to one point here

I was a member of the CWA during Idaho's Right to Work (for less!) battle in the 1980's. It was easily the most bitter political fight I have witnessed in my nearly 50 years of living here, with unions at the forefront of the battle. The law was upheld over a veto by our Democratic Governor John Evans. I can still remember the phrase "union boss Jackie Presser" used by the proponents on their torrential flood of radio and TV advertising. Unions have continued their fight to get the measure overturned since 1985, without success.

This state is a disgusting cesspool, politically.

[BuelahWitch]

44. I gave when Dr. Dean was running things

but no more.

[Historic NY]

51. Funny thing all the complainers want them to do things ...

that they'd have to solicit corporate donations for. That is the purpose of the fundraising agreements w/the candidates. The DNC came out of the 2012 elections with a 18.2 million of debt. They have been relying on the POTUS to headline fundraising too.

[fredamae]

53. The RNC is Grateful to DWS for her Help

in 2010/2012/2014! They gained House Seats-They took majority control in the senate.

The GOP donors money's could have Never been as effective as the help they got from DWS for alienating the Dem Base!

[jwirr]

55. I have been giving to individuals for many years now but I

do have a real concern about what I and others are doing. How is this boycott of the DNC, DCCC and DSCC going to effect the down ticket races? Are we going to win the battle and lose the war?

Neither Bernie or Hillary will be able to accomplish what they want without a Democratic Senate and as many Democratic House members as possible. Likewise we need Democratic governors and legislatures in as many states as we can get.

So how are will going to make sure that they are being helped.

[restorefreedom]

57. good example of return on investment

dws jettisons dean's successful 50 state plan, leading to blistering losses. meanwhile, she pushes dino's, has effectively helped repubs get elected, and is now blatantly suppressing democracy by squashing debate, instituting a draconian "exclusivity clause" all in an effort to favor her chosen candidate.

therefore, people in large numbers are saying "screw this shit" and are giving directly to their chosen candidate. dnc coffers dry up, which will lead to further losses and a cycle which will be hard to break without new leadership.

dws invested energy into this disaster and that energy is coming back. unfortunately it is hurting others, and she will likely end up with some high paying lobbyist job.

[kickysnana]

58. Perhaps us rank and file voters have their attention now?..doubtful.

[dickthegrouch]

59. Fundraising more than a year ahead of time is feeding the beast

I am of the opinion that any money spent more than a month ahead of the election is a complete waste on my part. I have too often had a candidate I just sent money to drop out. I have seen campaigns flame out. I have seen large sums wasted on egotistical jerks who stand no chance of learning enough to become the front runner.

At this point, IMHO, we have two very strong candidates in Hilary and Bernie, with a couple more who could easily come out of the woodwork if they chose to. I see no reason to plunk down my very hard-earned cash.

DWS and DNC need to recognize their sky-is-falling mails have completely turned me off. Until or unless they start sending me messages of HOPE (which is, after all what Obama ran on the first time) rather than fear, they will continue to seed the stage for disaster.