Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,758 posts)
Wed Apr 9, 2014, 06:51 PM Apr 2014

"Elizabeth Warren, Kingmaker?"

Elizabeth Warren, Kingmaker?

By Erika Eichelberger at Mother Jones

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/elizabeth-warren-pccc-senate-democrats

"SNIP.......................



Democrats' chances of keeping control of the Senate in 2014 don't look great. FiveThirtyEight polling guru Nate Silver recently predicted that "Republicans are now slight favorites to win at least six seats and capture the chamber," and the Washington Post's Monkey Cage blog gives the GOP an 80 percent chance of taking the Senate in 2014. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) isn't up for election this year. But the liberal darling is throwing her name—and her fundraising mojo—behind an effort to preserve the Dems' majority.

Warren has already raised $1.2 million this election season for 22 Senate candidates, including Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), according to Warren's political operation. That's a lot of dough. "Most members of Congress are not capable of raising that much for their colleagues…She's a rock star," says Viveca Novak, the editorial director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks the influence of money on politics. And in late March, the Massachusetts senator expanded her 2014 efforts even further, joining up with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), a liberal PAC, to endorse two lucky Senate candidates: Rick Weiland, who is running to replace outgoing Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota, and Rep. Bruce Braley, who is vying to take the place of retiring Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Landing a Warren endorsement is great news for candidates without a lot of name recognition at the national level, says John Halpin, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress. Weiland, the South Dakota candidate, says Warren's endorsement has been "extremely helpful" so far, adding that after Warren and the PCCC sent out their fundraising pitch, "there was quite a spike [in donations] in the first couple of days." (The Weiland campaign does not yet have final fundraising numbers for the initial Warren-PCCC push.)

Officials with the Braley campaign say the same thing. The campaign couldn't give out fundraising details, but an Iowa Democrat familiar with Braley's campaign says, "Let me put it this way. There's a reason why the [Warren] endorsement was rolled out before the March 31 fundraising deadline."




.......................SNIP"
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

MindMover

(5,016 posts)
1. I do not give two craps what the nerd of nerds has to say ....
Wed Apr 9, 2014, 06:53 PM
Apr 2014

he is wrong on this one, and my prediction is he is wrong BIGTIME ....

and as to Warren's influence .... my grandson said it best, it is pretty obvious that she is having an impact on a populist movement ...

so it didn't take a (pretty much self proclaimed) numbers guru to come up with that information ...

applegrove

(118,758 posts)
2. I agree Obama has turned it around before. Many times. The democrats have barely
Wed Apr 9, 2014, 06:55 PM
Apr 2014

started to nail the GOP on being, well, the GOP. I would assume the numbers will change once that happens.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
3. If these other Senators had the same agenda as Senator Warren, they wouldn't need her to solicit
Wed Apr 9, 2014, 07:00 PM
Apr 2014

campaign cash for them.

They'd be raking it in on their own merits.

Still, that's nice of Senator Warren to help them out...I hope she's getting some serious Presidential campaign endorsements as payback for her efforts.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
4. Um, they've raised more than she has
Wed Apr 9, 2014, 07:43 PM
Apr 2014

Senator Durbin (and I take him for an example, because he is my senator, and I recently contributed to his campaign) currently has $5,676,457 cash on hand that he's raised, and 0 debt.

I'll tell you one thing about Dick Durbin: he writes emails from time to time, which are quite informative, but only since the beginning of this year, with the Illinois primaries, has he started doing the kind of several-times-a-week fundraising letters. Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, who is not even my legislator, sends me requests for donations all the frigging time, and it started the month after she got elected.

Senators Durbin and Boxer are not in trouble for their elections in the least. They will be helping other candidates, both local and national with their campaign chests. If EW wants to help out with that, and in the process climb her way up the leadership ladder in the Senate, that's great. But don't be so naive as to think these senators need her money to get elected. Both Durbin and Boxer have been doing this since 1983, for more than 30 years ... that's more than a decade before Elizabeth Warren even decided she wouldn't be a Republican anymore.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Elizabeth Warren, K...