Is the Dem establishment finally about to give an inch?
Money! The Democratic Party leaders loves, loves, loves that money.
Fundraising ability is why Pelosi and Schumer got re-elected to leadership positions despite years of catastrophically bad election results.
Which is why this news is important.
The Democratic National Committee had its worst May since 2003, raising just $4.3 million dollars as it struggles to rebound from a series of election defeats, according to Federal Election Commission data.
The last time May fundraising was lower was in 2003, when the DNC raised just $2.7 million...
April brought in $4.9 million, making it the worst fundraising April for the DNC since 2009.
It's one thing not to win elections. Democrats will tolerate losing.
But not being able to bring in the big bucks? That's a problem!
If you can't bring in the cash then what good are you?
And it gets worse.
In contrast, the Republican National Committee raised more than double, notching $10.8 million in May, a record-high amount for an off-year.
Despite a cash advantage, Democrat Jon Ossoff lost Tuesday's special election for a Georgia House seat in the most expensive race in history, costing at least $40 million dollars.
The Ossoff disaster seems to be the crack in the dam. No longer is it just the grassroots who are demanding change.
It was in the meeting with Mr. Luján that Mr. Cárdenas, a member of the Democratic leadership, brought up Ms. Pelosi’s role in the Georgia race, calling it “the elephant in the room.” Ms. Pelosi was not present.
...Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio, who tried to unseat Ms. Pelosi as House minority leader late last fall, said she remained a political millstone for Democrats. But Mr. Ryan said the Democratic brand had also become “toxic” in much of the country because voters saw Democrats as “not being able to connect with the issues they care about.”
“Our brand is worse than Trump,” he said.
"I think the problem is we have not come up with an agenda and then we need a strategy to communicate it. We can't just be against something."
- Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J
The Democratic Party needs new leadership now. If elected, I will not vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker. Time to move forward and win again.
— Joe Cunningham (@JoeCunninghamSC) June 21, 2017
It's wrong and misses the point to put this all on Pelosi, but at the same time Pelosi is where you must start.
On Wednesday, some Democratic members of Congress publicly voiced concerns about Pelosi, raising the specter of a leadership challenge. “I think you’d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top,” Rep. Filemon Vela, a Texas Democrat, told Politico. “Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost, but she certainly is one of the reasons.”
Who knows? Once the leadership loses their jobs and reform starts, the reform process might get serious.
Comments
Cracks in the dam
usually lead to failure, fingers crossed here.
On a side note, this glaring example of how in tune
the MSM is with elites on the other side of the pond.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-tweets-you-wont-read/
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
The Dems wasted 7 months
Actually they wasted 2 years and 7 months.
They've been fighting their own membership for 7 months now, and it's becoming obvious to everyone that this is not a winning strategy. Defying your own voters will not win you elections (Duh!) and won't get you donations (Double Duh!).
It's simple arrogance that got us to this point.
Of course this attitude is mirrored at TOP, where non-approved opinions will get you banned, and web traffic keeps falling for some reason.
The real problem
breaking it down
Whoa! The truth out of the mouth of a Dem?!?
More here ...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BErgICyA7Hw width:400 height:240]
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.
@gjohnsit The "message" won't be
The "message" won't be heard if it comes out of the same mouths that are still dripping from corporate donors. If they'd elected someone from the Bernie side of the aisle for chairman, I guarantee you, donations would not have nosedived.
Perez got one ting right: They need to rebuild. Electing Perez, however, was a clear sign they're NOT rebuilding. If he really wants to rebuild, step down and let a Berniecrat take over.
Totally dodged the question.
as typical politicians typically do.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Given the money troubles
That Dem 'apartment' will soon be in foreclosure.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
I hope so.
Then they might have a fucking clue how the 10,000,000 families that got foreclosed and kicked out while the neolibs foamed the runway for the swindlers/donors/owners.
Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.
The bolded part of that quote
rings so true. HER campaign seemed to be based on the faulty premise that it's HER turn and you own HER your vote. HER couldn't even bother to feign interest in the problems of the little people and when HER was caught and had to, HER looked like a deer in headlights. That's the modern Democratic Party to me.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Corporation brands DON'T win elections!
Real live (or half dead) homo sapiens DO! I know: that observation has been done to death. It's still the truth though.
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
lol... when I first read this I read...
establishment finally about to give a "sh*t?
Well, not so much. I'm not holding my breath.
Stop Climate Change Silence - Start the Conversation
Hot Air Website, Twitter, Facebook
They care about money
No one is denying that they care about money. Or in this case the lack of money.
Which will quickly lead to the question of "How do we get more money?"
Which will quickly lead to the realization that you need to have some political power to get more money when you product is politics.
Which will quickly lead to the conclusion that you need to win elections to get that political power.
Which will finally lead to the obvious solution, the Dems needs to change their priorities so that they speak to working people.
It really is only a question of when, not if, the Dem leadership falls.
@gjohnsit You're assuming it
You're assuming it matters to their owners if they win or lose. It does not. We have a ONE party system and so long as it stays that way, the oligarchy is perfectly content with the Washington Generals losing.
Either way, they win.
I think that's only partially true
Sure, you get the most money if you win because, of course, you can sell off political favors. But even the losers have a valuable role in the kabuki theater and the duopoly needs them both. Consider how screwed the Republicans are now by owning all 3 branches. I know that was a real eye-opener for me when the Dems had that power and sold me down the river with it. I have to believe there are Republican voters thinking the same thing right about now.
Both parties can stay comfortably in their canape lifestyle so long as they can maintain the illusion that there's two parties.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
The only reason they would give us an inch...
is if they already had a plan to take a mile after we accept it.
They never do anything that doesn't lead to a direct benefit to them and their
donorsowners."I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Exactly.
I don't trust them as far as I can throw one of them. They'll probably just come up with some "messaging" about how they really, really do care, but alas, they just don't have the votes! Waaaahhhhh. Winning is about donor money, not about actual policies.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
“Our brand is worse than Trump,”
To further this discussion I read this essay yesterday.
Umair Haque was a principle at a large advertising agency in London (besides being a prolifice writer for Harvard Business Review back in the day).
He knows brands. In this essay he shows how stupid current Dem's are.
A good read as usual.
https://medium.com/bad-words/the-soul-of-a-brand-a7af45f3976e
I want a Pony!
Changing the lead singer in the band . . .
. . . after the audience has left doesn't usually entice them back to the room. You might have made sure that there are no alternative
partiesclubs to visit (probably by buying off the licensing board), but your audience is gonna choose to go to restaurants or just go home instead.Those band members had better have day jobs for a long time.
The thing is
the "leadership" should have lost their jobs in 2010. Then again in 2012. Then again in 2016.
Did they? No.
Why not? This is why - Oligarch $$$$.
How can you fail for over a decade and still put forward clueless septuagenarians who are going to inspire millennials, cease identity divides and bring forward any coherent message or strategy?
Well you can fail. And we have.
They are still trying to figure out how to use a cell phone.
"I gotta Tweet. I got to. Help? Staff? Anyone under 25?"
Crap
Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!
Firesign Theater
Stop the War!
Firing the executives
Actually the Dems gained slightly in 2012, so that was a no biggie.
2010, while devastating, could be rationalized as a one-off.
But 2014, after 2010, should have caused mass firings. If there was accountability.
However, the biggest crime was the lack of firings after 2016, when the grassroots absolutely demanded it. This lack of accountability, Hell, open defiance, is not how any political party should act if it ever wants to win elections.
Well, Warren and Bernie were brought into
the Dem Party Leadership (2014 and 2016, respectively), and as far as I can tell, nothing's changed.
Basically, it's amounted to a reshuffling of the deck chairs. New faces, but the same ol' corporatist agenda.
One would think that they may have learned something from nominating conservative/corporatist Dems like Mello and Ossoff. Apparently, they haven't--with the possible exception of Tim Ryan, who actually had the courage to say that Pelosi is 'toxic' in much of the nation. An understatement, if I've ever heard one!
She's despised by both the right and the (true) left.
[Edited: Correction-'Dem Party,' not 'DNC']
Mollie
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage."--Lao Tzu
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Two decades starting in 2006
Let's not forget what Pelosi said after they regained control of the house when they ran on rolling back the Bush abuses. "Tables and dry powder."
After Hillary's loss, Pelosi said that the party still doesn't need to change anything.
After the Osfoff lose this is her statement on why she feels the need to remain the party chair.
Pelosi defends leadership following special election loss
I see nothing, hear nothing, speak nothing.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Repulsive
The Democrat Party bobbing heads, Clinton, Pelosi, and Schumer are seen as repulsive by much of middle America. I predicted that Clinton would lose because I knew that middle America viewed her as repulsive. Just think through her and Bill's history. Trump was able to capitalize on that and even use that as a lever to get middle America to believe in his absurd policies on issues, but it was really all about disgust for the Clintons.
In tech we have a saying that all tech companies go through three cycles. First the visionaries and the engineers run the company. Then marketing runs the company. And then the bean counters run the company and forget that you have nothing without a vision. Companies like DEC generated huge streams of cash, making them seem invincible. DEC would always be in Massachusetts driving the economy, or so it seemed. The current Democrat leadership is corporatist in two ways. They kiss ass to corporate America and they run the company, the Democrat Party, as if it were a late stage tech company. The radicals are the engine of the party. The gas tank is full but you removed the engine because it was too noisy. Good luck with that!
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Great apercu!
"The gas tank is full but you removed the engine because it was too noisy."
And replace Pelosi with who, Steny Hoyer?
(insert puke emoji here). An interesting tidbit I read today in comments of a Jimmy Dore video discussing the Ossof loss:
WinkleGaming
WinkleGaming20 minutes ago
Its worth noting that Ossoff gained less votes this week than a completely fake ghost candidate named Rodney Stooksbury that raised zero cash, spent zero cash, and had no campaign whatsoever. Ossoff gained less than 124000, while the fake Stooksbury gained just over 124000 votes against Tom Price last November
Reply 4
According to cbs46.com Stooksbury was a ghost candidate
http://www.cbs46.com/story/33632482/who-is-the-ghost-candidate-for-us-6t...
this article from tvcrun.com seems to confirm that comment.
https://www.tvcrun.com/2017/06/21/five-hard-lessons-democrats-must-learn...
So Dems dumped 30 million into a candidate that couldn't even churn out more votes than someone who appears was a slug candidate to fill a ballot slot.
2018 be ugly for the Dems.
O.k. When is the next meeting for the revolution?
-FuturePassed on Sunday, November 25, 2018 10:22 p.m.
puke emoji
To generate the puke emoji here on c99, type all the following as one "word":
an asterisk *
the word "bad" bad
another asterisk *
with no spaces and no quotation marks. Upon preview or save of the message, the emoji will appear:
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Thanks
@thanatokephaloides Love it! I am sure we
Love it! I am sure we will be using that A LOT in the months to come!Thank you!
O.k. When is the next meeting for the revolution?
-FuturePassed on Sunday, November 25, 2018 10:22 p.m.
Back in the last century
Nancy Pelosi was a Democratic fundraiser in Baltimore. You could count the number of people in SF who knew her name without taking off your shoes.
But Nancy wanted a job as a congressperson, and the party looked around for a sure seat for her. Well there was an open seat in California - it was sufficiently high income so that she could relocate without having to live too close to the great unwashed, and the only person who could run against her was a true left, relatively (at least) honest GAY man named Harry Britt. But Harry was a good soldier, when they told him his career was over because Nancy wanted the job he had earned he took it and retired.
I wonder if Nancy remembers who Harry Britt was. I know she doesn't care.
On to Biden since 1973
Is the George Clooney Rule still in effect?
Remember when Clooney went on national TV and declared big money was needed to fight big money. And that the money he raised for Hillary was NOT being used against Bernie but for downstream candidates. Which was later pointed out as utter bullshit as the money was funneled to the DNC and then back to Hillary's campaign.
Seems establishment in a bind. They believe they need big money, but the more they lose, the less big money.
Too many pigs at the trough now...
Used to be you only had to bribe a few corrupt leafers... now everybody thinks they deserve a piece of the corruption action. ..
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
"Wholesale" versus "retail" fundraising or live/die by the sword
Since Bubba in 1992, the DNC and related Dem entities have adopted "wholesale" fundraising, depending on several thousand Big Money/special interest donors. In constrast, Howard Dean, Barack Obama, and Bernie Sanders have used "retail" fundraising, with millions of small donors. Do the math and it doesn't take "rocket science" to figure out that given funding limits, retail can raise as much or more than wholesale. (That does not take Super PACs into account).
In addition, "money doesn't vote, people do" and whether you're a Dem fat cat or a member of the 99%, no one can vote more than once. And while the fat cats/special interests want a return on investment and a fatter "bottom line," the 99% want legislation that will improve their lives or they will not turn out to vote.
This has been shown by Dems and independents who stayed home on 11/8/16 and also the energized voters, many of them young ones, who turned out to vote for Jeremy Corbyn. With a compelling platform or legislative proposals (Medicare for All, a living wage, free college), people will respond and vote while a well-funded candidate in pantsuits (Medicare for All will "never, ever pass") or pants (like Ossoff) won't win.
So after a decade of Dem losses up and down the ballot in Congress and the states, wholesale fundraising is turning into a "dry hole" for the DNC, DSCC, DCCC, DGA, etc., and more and more of the 99% are contributing their hard-earned money directly to the candidates of their choice. So let the DNC starve at the empty trough, along with anti-Trumpism and status quo "Resistance." Bwahahaha.
Retail, all the way
We can up-end this corrupt system if we're organized.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@CalGoldenBear
This is rather depressing but I do feel obliged to point that this is true - apart from such as Super-Delegates and the Electoral College. And Big Money sources such as corporations/billionaires get extra 'political speech' by being able to spare large sums of cash to produce ads and other propaganda intended to convince people to vote the way they want them to, so get extra votes by proxy. This besides employers using pressure to push vulnerable employees into donating to/'volunteering'/voting for, their own desired candidates.
If we're hungry for change and living wages, safe food supplies, air and drinking water, we should be eating the rich who politically interfere to prevent such things from being available to us. Metaphorically, of course, since that much fat wouldn't make for a healthy diet either...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
"We need a message"
"We need a message"
Which means going into a boardroom, paying some ridiculously high-priced consultant to stew for a bit to come up with the most nauseating, weak, platitude they can offer.
Unite!
Stronger Together!
@Strife Delivery I'mWithered!
I'mWithered!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
The Dem Establishment can't recognize when it lost...
They are poor deluded souls leading us astray because they can't even see when they have lost, or why
DNC Disbursements, Top 5 2017
(From the Not Dead Yet Department) I followed the money and ended with the impression most $$ has simply gone dark, but how would I know. I went to the source documents, I think. lol FEC.gov, click the Amount column header to sort by size. heh
Edited for readability, barely. I see coastal representation, plus Ohio. wtf are Affiliates? Consultants? Door knockers? I don't know. Spender: DNC SERVICES CORP./DEM. NAT'L COMMITTEE
I know I shouldn't be stunned but three and half million dollars for what now? Please, someone else poke around that data and tell me what to think. There's plenty more filters to create reports from the link. I mean let's have discussion about unsupporting the data service industries as much as possible, and build something different, if there's interest. De-centralized power to the people. (raises fist) I miss party politics sometimes, but here in California there's no way on earth I'd become a D again. No way.
peace
Pelosi is 80.
Everyone ages differently. However, she's no longer the agile, mental firebrand she once was. That sort of cerebral acuity is desperately needed now. Nancy no longer has it. She needs to retire gracefully and step aside for a new and younger leader. BTW, I will be a disabled 65 this fall. Rec'd!!
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
Pelosi too old, so Jaffe?
thanks, let's not be ageist I think you're right about cognitive abilities being something money can't buy. All politicians should retire from public service at their SS retirement age, if not before, that's what I think.
It's not like there's a lack of skilled people to serve in public for a couple few years, then go live life. None of this "bench building" b.s. that is where the long arm of corruption begins in my view. Just do your civic duty and then become citizen, stop revolving and trading up favors to build and protect your own nut. That includes every head currently talking, including "the most popular". Windows is the "most popular" desktop, right? Not the best.
peace
Hi, eyo - I'm guessing that Pelosi stays because of the health-
care 'deal' that all of our lawmakers and SCOTUS are privy to. Hey, it's probably hard to turn down 'free' primary care--care that can include having specialists called in from top medical facilities like Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, etc.--all for a nominal flat annual fee.
There's no filing of claims, no deductibles, no co-pays--no nothing.
All the while, the 'little people' have to have skin in the game!
I'm getting ready to include the blurb/quote above in my sig line, since the Administration is looking at converting Medicaid into a block grant program; and, since the last Administration chiseled away at Medicare benefits for years.
Sometimes I wish there were a way to coordinate a Twitter campaign, targeting all lawmakers in an effort to make them accountable to us, for denying us the exceptional medical benefits which they enjoy at our expense.
Mollie
"Every time I lose a dog, he takes a piece of my heart. Every new dog gifts me with a piece of his. Someday, my heart will be total dog, and maybe then I will be just as generous, loving, and forgiving."
____Author Unknown
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
"the rest of their care is paid for by... U.S. Navy Budget" ?!
thanks, why is no one demanding OAP-for-all? Medicare-for-All insurance is weak tea compared to actual health care. Wiki: Attending Physician of the United States Congress
Wow, house calls and everything. Money comes out of the Navy budget because of course. Feel the burn for real! mmph
peace
That's it, eyo! 'OAP-For-All' will be the heading
for my new sig line. I'm not sure how to do it, but, gonna try to figure out how to create a #OAP-For-All Twitter hashtag. That could be the quickest way to disseminate this info to the general public.
I could be wrong, but I figure that if enough of the American public becomes aware of the medical services/perks enjoyed by the very lawmakers who are studiously chiseling away at the remaining skimpy public medical programs, it 'might be' possible to get enough folks riled up to demand a medical program that is a true NHS-like program. That's what we really need.
While it's true that Traditional Medicare's not bad, it can be relatively expensive if one carries the premiums for both a Medigap supplement, and a very comprehensive Part D (RX) plan.
Thanks for the Wikipedia link. This medical care is very similar to the care that the President and Vice-President and their families receive from the 'Physician To The President.'
Of course, everyone knows that the President gets medical care on our dime. What fewer folks probably realize is the extent to which 535 lawmakers, and 9 Supreme Court Justices, benefit from public largesse.
Have a good one!
Mollie
"Every time I lose a dog, he takes a piece of my heart. Every new dog gifts me with a piece of his. Someday, my heart will be total dog, and maybe then I will be just as generous, loving, and forgiving."
____Author Unknown
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."--Will Rogers
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.