Kos has an update on the Dean fundraising efforts we discussed the other day, and provides some perspective:
So Dean has cut the RNC’s traditional 3-1 advantage (or more) in fundraising to a 2-1 advantage and raised $11 million more than McAuliffe raised in 2003. Not to mention that Dean’s numbers come the year after a presidential election — the worst political fundraising time possible, while McAuliffe’s came during the presidential cycle. Meanwhile, the RNC has remained static.
Dean has also been fundraising in the states, FOR the states. Past DNC chairmen would sweep into Lousiana or California, raise some money, and then ship the cash off the DC. Dean has garnered raves in the states for funneling that money to the local parties. Those are dollars not tallied in the RNC versus DNC comparisons. Mehlman isn’t out tirelessly raising money for state parties.
It seems that rather than not doing a good job raising money, Dean appears to be doing a much better job fundraising.
Jorge
Give us money Rarrgghhhhh!
Lines
I hear that he’s telling little old ladies that if they donate $1000 to the DNC that he’ll wear a little purple band-aid to the inaugeration ball and say a prayer to the FSM for them.
Or something like that. As long as the money is coming from legitimate sources, good. I hope someone is making sure of that.
Boombo
It seems that rather than not doing a good job raising money, Dean appears to be doing a much better job fundraising.
Inconcievable!
DougJ
He’s actually wearing a brown thumb to honor all the Congressmen who had their thumbs up their asses during the run-up to the war.
jaime
B-B-But the Freeper talking point is that Dean is being outraised 2-1. Why’d you have to go and provide context?
Vladi G
Gee, John, are you sure that adding that context really changes anything?
texas dem
Hm. Now I want to know what the agenda was under that article. I vaguely recall a bunch of hostile quotes from national Democrats. Someone out to stomp Dean? There sure weren’t any counter-quotes from state Dems.
Vlad
The DLC doesn’t like Dean, big surprise.
Another Jeff
That’s a dumbass statement for numerous reasons, but the biggest one is that it has nothing to do with the “Freepers”.
It has to do with the fact that there are numerous people in the Washington establishment (Republican AND Democrat) who don’t like and don’t trust Dean, and, as far as Democrats go, didn’t want him as Chairman, and they jump as the chance to point it out if they think he’s not doing a good job.
The fact that the article John originally linked to was in the Washington Post is a good example.
DougJ
/snark
Another Jeff is right. The sniping at Dean is from pre-Dean Democrats for the most part. I hope this is a point that Dems don’t miss: that the Hillary wing of the part are essentially “Vichy Democrats” more committed to maintaining their own power than to any sort of reform. They’re really not that different from the Rove-DeLay wing of the Republican party.
jaime
Yes…But the criticism’s from the Anti-Dean dems are filtered through the Moonie Times, Drudge and NewsHax and become the Freeper talking points.
I’ve read on numerous righty blogs about what a failure Dean is because he’s trailing 2-1 in fundraising and how the difference is made up by large donations from Hollywood and Geroge Soros and the like.
I agree with ya AJ. No need to refer to my statement as ‘dumbass’
Perry Como
They should really make Bob Shrum the DNC chairman. That man woul lead the Democrats into a bold, new era of failure.
Mac Buckets
“Better than Terry McAuliffe” should be the dictionary definition of “damning with faint praise.” There are a dozen stooges commenting on this blog that could do better for the Dems than McAwful.
The Disenfranchised Voter
All the more reason to like him.
Jack Roy
Actually, no, Dean’s improving over a historical oddity but is right in line with how Democrats usually do. I’m sticking with my earlier understanding, that 2-to-1 is the normal Republican advantage. Why McAuliffe fell off that mark by a bit I don’t know, but I’m pretty confident in my recollection that this is just a return to the normal state of affairs.
don surber
You take Kos’ word as gospel?http://opensecrets.org/presidential/index.asp
George W. Bush (R) $367,228,801
John Kerry (D) $326,236,288
I won’t even go into the 527 advantage Dems had. Top 6 527s totaled $318 million — all Dem. Next came Swifties at $22 million
(I posted this Saturday. Not to pat myself on the ass or anything)
CaseyL
Dean has also used some of the money to make good on his “Challenge in All 50 States” pledge.
There are now at least 3 DNC employees in each of 38 states, a huge advance over previously, when a DNC team would sweep in 6 months before an election (if then) and need to get its media, ground, rapid response, and GOTV games up and running from scratch.
Mike S
And that relates to DNC fund raising how?
Vladi G
Kinda like “not as bad as Saddam”.
Otto Man
Well, since the numbers you just gave were from the presidential candidates’ campaigns and not the RNC/DNC, I wouldn’t spend too much time patting yourself anywhere. But thanks for playing.
Ian
Who woulda thunk it, Kos an apologist for Dean and the DNC. The fact is, the RNC doesn’t need to do anything about fundraising because whatever they are doing is right.
Also I don’t get his whole thing about local elections .. the RNC has been focused on local elections far before the DNC has. And did Dean not say that he would COPY the RNC’s agenda and go help local elections??
Mike S
I keep reading this thinking I’m missing the wisdom displayed in the comment. But it just makes no sense.
Markos is called an “apologist” for correcting with, ummm, actual numbers and facts. He says nothing about the RNC needing to do anything.
Then he goes into something about local elections that make litle sense as well. Of course the RNC has been involved in locals for a long time. And the DNC hasn’t, which has been a problem.
ppGaz
It’s the second biggest reason I like him.
The biggest is, when the old Dems and the idiot MSM types manufactured the “scream” event to knock him down, he didn’t whine. He just took ownership of the thing and moved on.
In MealyMouthLand, where the DLC lives, you can hurt a candidate by tweaking a funny video or claiming he has an illegitimate black daughter. In DeanLand, you just say what you think is true and let the chips fall where they may. One Dean is worth a thousand of those mealy mouthed lying sons of bitches we call politicians.
ppGaz
You mean, carrying the water for rich people and corporate lobbyists?
You are quite right, sir. What they are doing is exactly right.
Otto Man
Not sure what the “apologist” label means, or why we should be surprised at any of this. Kos was an early backer of Dean, and often had fundraising links to the DNC on his site.
If Kos supported the D-L-C, well, that would be news.
jaime
If gangland style murders of former Casino partners, illegally laundering money to and from Texas and Ohio, and cynically manipulating the right wing “wacko” base with the Terry Schiavo fiasco is wrong, I don’t want to be right.
Geek, Esq.
Does anyone seriously think that Dean wasn’t an upgrade over McAwful?
jaime
Yes…mostly DLC types and Republicans who whine like babies when Dean won’t apologize for calling Bush a liar.
KC
Bottom line the way I see it though, is that the DNC is still behind the RNC in cash.
Kimmitt
Not in terms of fundraising. McAuliffe really did have a gift there. It’s just that Dean is better.
ppGaz
The DougJ-ification of the blog is now complete.
Which is a good thing, actually.
Jimmy Jazz
Seriously. I need me one o’ them rigged RNC slot machines: insert $1 of your own money and receive thousands of taxpayer dollars in return while having your own taxes cut dramatically. As the Tigua Indians might say: “That’s heap fucked up, white man!”
DougJ
God, Surber is out to lunch. How can he not know the difference between the DNC and the Kerry campaign? Sorry to be a grump, but that is just pathetic.
All snark aside, Surber makes me appreciate Darrell, Defense Guy, and even Richard Bennett.
p.lukasiak
Cole didn’t have to go to Kos to find the rebuttal — virtually all the information cited by Kos was in the original article linked by Cole.
Of course, it was on the second page, down toward the middle, and you had to do some math to figure out what was actually going on with the money.
And, if cole had bothered to read the comments in the original thread, he wouldn’t have had to refer to Kos at all.
Lines
DougJ: Its funny, Surber is becoming a joke all over the blog-o-sphere. I usually just assume he’s a spoof and move on, it makes things much more fun.
Birkel
It’s funny that the DNC acts as if they consistently raise less money than the RNC but somehow Democratic candidates spent more $$$ in the 2004 election cycle than did Republicans. I wonder how the party that touts itself as the defender of the li’l guy can spend more money, nominate a rich guy like Heinz-Kerry for President and consistently win the demographic of $10M+.
It is to wonder…
DougJ
I emailed Surber to ask if he was a spoof and he emailed something pissy back. Maybe he’s just a really good spoofer?
demimondian
What constitutes “all over the blog-o-sphere”? Where else has he been cropping up?
Tractarian
I like Don Surber because he put a picture of himself on his blog. He didn’t have to do that, you know.
Perry Como
Surber has a famous on-line chili recipe?
DougJ
You know, Bennett’s chili ideas were pretty good. I give him credit for that.
Mike S
It’s funny that you post this comment in a thread that has many comments about the DNC being different than individual candidates.
I’d also love to see a cite for the claim that the dmes spent more $$$ than the Republicans.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
Gettysburg, in a metaphorical sense.
Otto Man
That was him, too? I guess the delusions have been widespread. First we had the observation that Bush is Lincoln, and then the bold claim that the DNC was really the Kerry campaign. What’s next? Dick Cheney is the kindliest old soul since Mister Rogers?
Krista
Bite your tongue. Dick Cheney isn’t fit to wipe the dirt off of Fred Rogers’ shoes.
BIRDZILLA
Whats that dum jackass trying to say now its he just trying to keep from sticking his foot in his mouth?
Pelikan
“ia ia Fthagn!” right back at you BIRDZILLA.
Seriously though, Dean has the one thing that I admire about Bush, when he speaks, no matter how articulate, you sense that he’s speaking the Truth, Moses on the mount style. That he’s a true believer.
The difference of course is that Dean doesn’t seem to be in waaaay over his head. I’m sure some of you knee-jerk types would disagree, but I suspect that the doctor will continue to suprise in the next election cycle. By all means though, keep replaying that scream thing, it’s apparently the best argument you’ve got against him.
Vlad
“Bite your tongue. Dick Cheney isn’t fit to wipe the dirt off of Fred Rogers’ shoes.”
Mr. Rogers would’ve been furious with what the Republicans are/were trying to do to public television. He was a kind and giving man, but everyone has limits.
TM Lutas
The Kos numbers seemed wrong so I googled a bit and came across some DNC bragging points about how the DNC had outraised the RNC for the first time in 30 years during the 2004 election cycle. I also recall the “traditional” RNC advantage as being 2:1, not 3:1. Try looking here:
http://opensecrets.org/bigpicture/ptytots.asp?cycle=2002
It has a comparative set of graphs for national party fundraising both on soft and hard money. By quick calculation, the traditional republican advantage was only for hard money and averages slightly under 2:1. The soft money stakes lately were near parity and were never as bad for Democrats as hard money.
For Dean to be behind 2:1 with no soft money available, you’d have to go back before the 1990s to find a record that bad for a DNC chairman.
Kos provides perspective? Pull the other one.