I'll be completely honest: it's personal. I can't get behind BHO or HRC* for petty, personal reasons. Or matters of loyalty and friendship, take your pick. Either way, I know what I know about both of them, and their campaigns, and I can't honestly get behind either one of them or have "faith." Either one is better than a Republican and that's enough this time around. But let me lay some deep irony on you. They are both about to turn to people like me to finalize this "process" of "choice." People like me who have self-ejected from the system, mainly because we're sickened by it. What sickens us most? The incestuous, corrupt, undemocratic root of the system: the need to raise lots of money to buy ads on teevee and in the media. That same SCLM
which distorts the process, hides facts and promotes lies, and is like a demonic maw when it comes to money. You know they will break records this year, again, in terms of total media spending before it's all over. So here's the funny part:
That record spending is a direct result of the fact that the media, ever hungry for more money and control over the process, more or less forced/seduced both parties to get behind a campaign that began even before the last election results had been counted. It's longer, louder, less meaningful and more repetitive, and more expensive than ever before. And what is the result?
All the campaigns are running out of money well before "it's over," and at the same time, a hungry media has pushed back the "it's over" date to get even more money, to make them run even longer on fumes and funding. Now the bigtime players of the Village/Beltway/Elite fundraising game have found that the traditional slosh-flow has reached the max/limit. Who is left to turn to, once all the millionaires and corporations friendly to your cause have tapped out?
Heh, you, Gentle Internet User. You. I won't call you "sucker." I've given in the past too.
But let me lay this comment from this thread on you:
Let's put the Obama activist and donor numbers in perspective - 650,000 donors is a lot, but John Kerry had around 2 million donors, and George Bush had roughly as many. Richard Viguerie and Roger Craver, direct mail gurus, have frequently noted that there are roughly 10 million political direct mail donors in this country total, though that number might have changed. What is novel about the Obama campaign is not the number of donors but the involvement of those people in his campaign. They are working in caucuses and volunteering, not just giving. This has been a strategy since the beginning.
What is remarkable about the last 48 hours is the haul by the Hillary Clinton campaign of around $7 million from 45,000 online donors or so.
Catch that last part? 45K. Not really very many at all. I passed right by it, and then I read this comment later in the thread:
As a former Deaniac, I can't help but smile and think,
they are just discovering now the value of "putting up a bat??!!
Maybe it was hubris, they "had already been there, done that" - won the presidency before the internet - they didn't need to learn any new tricks.... their rolodex worked just fine thank you very much....
Right..
It's always fun to watch someone discover the power of technology for the very first time.
You're right, they are probably giddy in the HC campaign right now with the response they've gotten.
I slapped my head when I read that. Of course the HRC crew, bluebloods of the feminist Village/Bicoastal/Ivy Lg/Lived Through It All types who are loyal unto death, probably don't have too many funky thinkers in the mix just now. They have probably relied on a combination of loyalty, "Emily's List" type organizational support, The Clenis and its secret powers to locate cash and free airtime, and some other things it's too late for me to think of right now. But dirty, unwashed intertubes types? Who have proven how much we hate her? Goodness no. Until...Oh crap! HRC is Tanking too early! Well, shit- maybe we can turn to them, just give it a try. That Stoller guy was saying something about something the other day, or was is PeterD?
When the rolodex is burned thru, it's no time to despair. That's the beauty of what us old timers call the "open source" movement. It's open! You can just ask for money, make a claim or push some policy or even get ball-bustingly mad/cry like a baby, whatever you think pulls open the purse (and this time it is indeed purse) strings. Dean was a noooooo-body, an outfreyne nonVillager from a little state. Look at all he did, they had to literally crucify him to shut him down. If things are really as bad as I'm hearing, HRC folk would do well to come down from the mighty heights of insiderdom, and set aside the martry's crown of playing with the hateful bullies of the SCLM.
...Christ, I bet I've already gone too far into intertubes jargon for many of them to understand. I'll have to work on that.
Anyway, yes, this is a crass, based on raw emotion, gender card playing, stereotype employing, probably totally wrong post. Still, 45K/7m? That's what I call untapped potential. There are months to go. And millions of women just now tuning into this race. Because they always expected you to make it this far, Hillary. Now and soon will be the time to tell them, you were "listening" to those beliefs. New donors plus the last of your old donors who aren't tapped out could get your throught this, and there is no cheaper way to try than the intertubes. Call me if you need some help.
*and to thwart sexism and racism, i'm going to try to just use the candidates' initials from now on. unload the negative value of their names, as it were, equalize them a tad.
- chicago dyke's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[encrypted]+#b94+
Printer-friendly version
Front page
Comments
Sometimes things are just too simple, CD
Never occurred to me that our famously free press would push the calendar early because they stood to make a lot of money. [slaps forehead] Gad.
I'll just leave the money on the dresser, then, shall I?
I'm glad you're not endorsing anyone. Corrente is fair and balanced!
[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Slpas head here too.
I don't know that I've read that anywhere.
I read a lot, too.
Not enough books, mind you.
phat
Ahem. Xan solves it all for you
It requires a little collusion between the candidates (at the mid-upper staff level of course, not in person) but if I were Queen of the Morning this is what I'd make them do:
Shut up.
Cease any and all on-air advertising in any broadcast/paid medium. As of the Mittster's pullout (ew) this morning you are no longer running against each other. You are running against John McCain.
Live with Free Media, the blogs and through that, word of mouth. Squeeze every nickel till the buffalo shits--pay nothing but staff and travel expenses. Shut off the tit that flows to the media.
The networks will still cover you--for free!--because they have to. Do every debate, every Town Hall, every free event you can manage...but run no ads, send out no mailers except fundraisers and make those very targeted.
You have no idea how grateful the American public will be to have a few months free of the incessant fucking babble of ads. Let McCain waste his ammunition wobbling back and forth between two moving targets. You on the other hand have the range and are dialed in to, sweetly and politely, lob shells onto his position (the ongoing Republican disaster which is the Bush regime's looting of the treasury, wreckage of the economy, abuse of the military, shredding of the Constitution, constant infringements on normal activities like travel, incessant intrusions on privacy, and more you can probably think of) and all with a picture of The Hug displayed at all times.
Let the Kumbaya ring out from the mountaintop...but between the two of you, HRC and BHO. Towards McCain drip nothing but disdain. And start putting in some plugs for downticket races everywhere you go, m'kay? You, and we, will be ever so glad of this later, like about a year from now.
Won't get fooled again....
I see my problem is that I'm not being cynical enough.
What you say makes a lot of sense. I had no idea that there was such a big pool of True Believers that hadn't been tapped.
In 2004, for the first time in my life, I gave a boatload of money to Kerry/Edwards and several of the 527's that supported them. (I go back and forth between thinking Doh! and feeling good about it.) As a result, I get a lot of phone calls from fundraisers, sometimes a candidate/DNC heavy hitter, whenever there's an election.
My income has dried up since then, but even if I had it to give, I wouldn't. If Ghandi rose from the dead I wouldn't give money to his Presidential campaign. Knock on a few doors, give a few pep talks, yeah. Money, no way.
I ask every one of the fundraisers what they'd do differently (than in 2004); none of them have come up with anything new.
My point, (I think) - campaigns will definitely get more money from their new supporters, but how many donors are one and out? Then telling everyone they know that the game is rigged . The fundraisers don't care so much about that, I guess.
BTW, I had no idea about the numbers in your post. Good stuff.
A pox on all of their houses.
In 04, Dean was my passion. I loved the bat and gave as much as I could. In 06, I accepted the "elect more democrats" and even gave some money to a guy running for office in Texas. In return, I watched netroot lose, candidates in my state get ignored, and Jim Webb vote the Party line after election. That did it. I cancelled my democracy bond and zipped up my wallet - tight. If I give, I'm keeping it local.
I like your initials idea!
But, for pure snarky Valley Girl-type parody, Barry and Hill or Hillary will still work.
xan, you must defecate gold
this is pure truth:
think of yourself. think of those times you've...worried about making a timely car payment. that's happened to most of us, right? including when we were young and didn't have control over the whole of the trust fund? anyway, yes- if they are worried, this is the smart thing to do. as you say, what else will they cover?
...crap, the cat is playing with wax. let's revisit, and i'll go clean up this mess. silly cat.
Naw, it disturbs the balance of the septic tank
the shitting gold thing I mean.
Love the concept though. The last of the 401K has been cashed in and i have about another 3 months before Something Has to Happen income-wise. :)
Re: cats and wax, somebody at the Crack Den was talking the other day about cat and a supposedly "dripless" candle that wasn't, and the resulting feline disaster. I think the final ruling (amazingly enough other people had had similar experiences) was that the best bet was an ice cube and kiddie scissors--chill it to harden and cut it off. Otherwise the cat will eat it and the next few days of litterbox input will be Most Unfortunate.
Perhaps this was HRC's 'plan B'
I mean, right now you gotta believe that all those "small donors" that made Obama's first quarter 2007 numbers look so impressive are sick to death of being hit up for money by his campaign.
All that Hillary has really asked of her 'rank and file' supporters up until this time is their votes --- and she was hoping that was all she would need from them. Now, she can go to all these potential "small donors" and say "I need your help", and be able to raise considerable sums from these people.
(people seem to forget that Obama's "january miracle" was the result of a whole bunch of people jumping on the Obama bandwagon after he won in Iowa, and the media was predicting Obama victories in NH (and NV.) These were people who wanted to make sure that they were on 'the list' -- that they'd be invited to the general election private fundraisers and get their picture taken with "the next president".)
Nah
That's what I said to some well-meaning musician-pals who have been motivated by the bush-disaster to get involved and donate their musical talents to the Obama cause. (Being supposedly a "native son" of Hawaii, he's the only viable candidate here.) These guys have been hearing my rants about bush for years, but don't know it's the tip of the iceberg. I'm sympathetic to them, being that they're not yet fully aware of the Potential Power of the ('Net) Pipes.
You're right. It ain't 2004/2006. I'm withholding my politickin' donations and participatory time until a candidate appears who vows to return the "publicly owned" airwaves to the actual public by
--legislating either free advertising access or no paid-advertising access to the airwaves by all candidates; and,
--restoring the fairness doctrine.
I don't see any movement toward the above by any candidate, so come November, it'll be hold-the-nose time in the booth. Like Phat remarked, I suspects most of us Correnteproles are just barely and provisionally Democrats.