WP: Democrats Losing Race For Funds Under Dean

Democrats Losing Race For Funds Under Dean

By Chris Cillizza
Special to The Washington Post
Saturday, November 12, 2005; Page A01

The Democratic National Committee under Howard Dean is losing the fundraising race against Republicans by nearly 2 to 1, a slow start that is stirring concern among strategists who worry that a cash shortage could hinder the party's competitiveness in next year's midterm elections.

-snip-
One Democrat with close ties to Dean and the DNC said that expectations were unfairly high for the governor's ability to raise dollars from the Internet. "It is a very different process to raise money for a presidential campaign than it is for a party committee," said the veteran fundraiser, who talked candidly about DNC finances on the condition of anonymity. "Donors are a little skeptical that the DNC is a good investment."

As some see it, Dean's larger problem is with the care and feeding of wealthy contributors, people capable of giving the maximum $26,700 allowed annually under federal law. Bob Farmer, a past DNC finance chairman, said that "where the chairman can make an impact is with the big donors and the big fundraisers."

Dean does not enjoy long relationships with these people and remains uncomfortable asking for a significant contribution after just meeting a donor, said party operatives familiar with his style. One high-dollar donor in the Washington area said the outreach by Dean has been woeful: "The only explanation I can fathom for the virtual total lack of quality communications is they are still in the process of figuring things out in terms of who their major donor list is."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/11/AR2005111101833.html

Show Dean and the DNC some love - Democracy Bonds are great - http://www.democrats.org/democracybonds.html

"Donors are a little skeptical that the DNC is a good investment." - I've seen quite a few threads started by people proud of how they told off the DNC when they called for a donation. The Dems have been fighting. Some positive reinforcement is in order.

FYI - the DNC is NOT the DLC - I've seen that confusion around here before so lets just make that clear.

2006, 2006, 2006!!!!

Republicans gather their money from a few dozen deep pocketed extremists, who continually buy influence.

Democrats will do okay... Especially when the Big Dog gets revved up.

Hyernel :)

because my gut tells me we will all step up to the plate now and make 2006 the year of the ASS :dem: kicking! Yes?

Better get rid of that guy. He's making a difference.

motivates people to start giving more especially since things are looking up for 2006.

I'm not surprised Dean isn't really comfortable begging rich people for money. That has never seemed like his style.

I am shocked that these Democratic fat cats are NOT dishing out the money for the sake of the damn country. Shame! Open your wallets and get going!

Recently (thankfully), I haven't seen any of "the DNC just called and I told them to forget about any donations from me until ...."

I hope that crap is over.

by like 2 to 1. Which one is right?

:shrug:

Dean is trying to do it with smaller donors. Will take a while.

May I offer my congratulations to all who withheld support.

Oh, I forgot to add that a lot of the corporate money is swinging the way of the DSCC and the DCCC.

in California..with all his big fatcat friends thrown in.

rather than DNC?

I donate to individual campaigns rather than the DNC, not out of protest, but because I know how difficult it is to raise hard money. This is not to say that I absolutely refuse to give to the DNC. If I go to a DNC event, I gladly write a check.

I would encourage others to consider donating to the DNC, especially if you value low dollar fundraising. The grassroots will not be heard until it is recognized that this collective is financially potent.

Could the "bigwigs" and the establishment money men be holding back contributions to make Dean look bad? After all, they didn't want Dean as Chairman, it was the "little people" who made it happen.

We can fight this, but not with progressive groups and others saying they are not supporting the DNC.

The GOP is starting after him, and I figured the corporate types were ready as well.

End of rant.

promising "I'll donate when they start fighting" have started donating again. I mean, the Dems really are fighting up there now.

Of course, that reasoning was flawed to begin with, in my humble opinion.

just aren't being courted like they used to be.

-Proud Owner of Democracy Bond ;)

They were expected for sure.

"Why won't he return my calls????"

You're looking in the wrong place.

The Post has demonstrated time and time again that they have little regard for facts- they've been perfectly willing to conceal, slant "news" copy and allow reporters with blatant conflicts of interest to cover stories affecting them personally.

You might as well turn to Fox news or CNN- as their reputations are about on par with the Post's these days.

That big donor tapping is not happening could be a good thing for people that don't have $26K+ a year to donate.

when we have the people!!! 36% Polls for Bush kinda says it all!!!

The ones in the Democratic Party who are comfortable in the lap of the corporations are not pleased either.

It is the price he will pay for trying to rebuild the party for and by the grassroots.

I have said here many times this would happen...all the withholding support threads. There is no excuse for doing that to when someone is trying to give us a place at the table.

Just said the corporate donors were probably not happy with Dean. If I were a big donor, used to access....I would not be happy either.

since they're now turning sour on their now battle fatigued favorite, DLC is their last hope for their own kind to be rulers of the "free world". MSM don't want no stinking working class types running things. They'd have to deal with real issues that effect real people, writing our stories in the press - instead of making it up as they go.

remember the days and weeks following the stolen 2004 elections?

all the cable networks and broadcast news anchors and pundits suddenly got religion, convinced that the fundelmentalists made up the majority of the Americans electorate.

For the first six months of 2004 anytime I tuned in, I could see Chris Mathtews, Aaron Brown, Larry King and Paula Zahn proseltyzing on their shows. Even before the Tsunami hit just after christmas - but including that time as well. Funny, all that phony crap came to an end during Katrina.

MSM needs the DLC to reaffirm their own existance and purpose in life - give them something they can suck their thumbs with.

Pathetic.

Remember Terry Shiavo?

is ..Why does this story appear now..I mean how significant is this when there are so many issues affecting our country to write about..some how I believe there is a Republican lurking somewhere behind this story...........If I remember correctly we out raised the republicans the last quarter leading up to the Democratic convention and went well ahead of them overall leading up to the Nov 04 election(and that was just grass roots funding).So this story is just meaningless ........
When the time is right the Democrats will be there with open check books because we want our country back...........

When are folks going to open their checkbook?

This is an attack on his outspokenness and the wins last Tuesday.

So could you tell me please just what time you think is right?

until the heat of the 2006 campaign is in full gear may be too late to get the state systems up and running at full steam.

the corpwhorate owned MSM have decided it is time to start pumping Bush's ratings back up. The headlines of his latest speech regarding Iraq and how he and his aide have come out aggressively against his critics was the first clue. The same type of reporting they gave him prior to 2000. They have been cowed by his aiding and comforting the enemy line, even if he is the chief aider and comforter.

Dean is the man!

:woohoo: :applause: :patriot:

why does everyone speak "anonymously" in the newspapers these days?

"One Democrat with close ties to Dean and the DNC said that expectations were unfairly high for the governor's ability to raise dollars from the Internet. "It is a very different process to raise money for a presidential campaign than it is for a party committee," said the veteran fundraiser, who talked candidly about DNC finances on the condition of anonymity. "Donors are a little skeptical that the DNC is a good investment."

Donors are skeptical? Why because Dean won't bow down and kiss their toes like bush does his donors?

We don't have time for "Donors"..we're busy building a Grassroots effort like the kind that's never been seen before.

I'll put my money on Dean and a Democracy Bond.

I'm telling you straight- these guys have gotten to the point where they just make shit up and the editors don't care- so long as it supports their ideological bent. They've done this so often that there's no longer any way to figure out whether there's an actual source or not- and if so, whether it's credible.

In the course of about 3 months last winter, I read no less than three science articles with slanted copy that attributed outright false statements of fact to unnamed sources. I brought one of these into my environemental epidemiology class- and we all literally laughed at it!

Suffice it to say, in the reality based community, the Post long ago lost its reputation for honesty and/or integrity.

When you're right you're right.

:woohoo: :applause: :patriot:

this thread.

Who knows how many lurkers may have also donated?

and doing their fucking part.

You're DEMOCRATS first. This is for ALL of us.

refusing to support the DNC.

Let's not turn this into a Dean, Kerry, Clark flame-fest.

Calling people out alienates them. It doesn't make them more willing to give. It would just make them feel insulted - especially if they have already been supportive.

and sent an email encouraging people to donate to the DNC - as the DNC codes these things, it's known this raised a large amount of money.

I am a Kerry supporter also, giving to his PAC.

in November of 2001? HMMMMM????

And what were Republican donations like at the same time?

It's an off year one year after the presidential election, most senatorial candidates haven't announced yet, and we don't even HAVE a democrat to put up for representative here.

The republicans have ALWAYS, ALWAYS out-raised us by ratios of like, 10 to 1, and I think Dean's doing an AWESOME job at fund-raising.

I'm someone who would usually give 25 or 50 bucks to a candidate a month or so before the election, but I have a 10 dollar democracy bond and I FEEL GREAT!!!!! It's not a lot, but I'm between jobs and I don't have a lot to give, but I feel like I'm doing my part to TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!!!!

I can not find my stuff right now, but I am pretty sure on that part.

Someone posted a diary on this.
Armando says:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/11/235924/81
"Dean raises $11 million more in the comparable period than Cash Machine McAuiliffe (by rep anyway) and you are bitching about it?

If it is the cash on hand that bothers you, well say that, thought I assume the expenditures probably went to something worthwhile.

Is the idea that you would rather have the money in the bank than being spent?"

I remember his being on or ahead of pace.

Also I remember that Dean gave over 5 million to VA for the election. That is a huge chunk of change, and it hurts other states...but it was promised by McAuliffe on his way out the door.

I assume that is where the $$$ is going.

That is exactly what we wanted, isn't it?

I think they are doing this because that is all they know how to do...attack. They will do it to anyone who makes a difference.

story. I'm not going to wait to get worried until I know what's going on at the state level.

but we won the governorship.

It's hard to second-guess campaign expenditures... what if we'd spent 4.5 million and lost???

And it was a very important win...or * wouldn't have shown up there, would he?

Dean's ideas for funding the Democratic Party--essentially, the Deanies model--is doomed.

Rich donors give the party most of its money, hence the reason it has become so close to the GOP in most important respects. And they don't like Dean, even as tepid a reformer as he is; they prefer fully neutered henchmen like McAuliffe.

Nor will ordinary people dig deep in a period of economic retrenchment to support a party of lapdogs. I certainly won't give a red cent to the party until it is dramatically reconstituted as an opposition party, rather than an auxiliary of the GOP.

Complicating the picture is the broad perception that our political duopoly is broken beyond repair. Who knows how many grassroots Dems are ready to flee this sinking corporate ship, and leave it to the Liebermans, Kerrys, and Hillarys?

Why Dean would waste any more time with them is a mystery. His moment is fading, and he should seize it.

Right now the two parties are neck-and-neck... 51-49 some days and 49-51 other days. But if Dean bailed he'd take the most liberal 20% of the population, and it would be 20-30-50. And we'd never win another election again.

This post seems to confuse DLC (Hillary, Lieberman, et al) and DNC, which DLC has (until recently) been able to hijack. That is why we needed someone from the grass roots to take the DNC.

Democratic party IS stepping up to the plate recently - look at the Black Caucus, and others speaking out. We need to support them when they do this...not pull out.

Admittedly, the party isn't used to being that effective...something I've commented on elsewhere. But I think that Howard is an honest person trying to do an honest job.

With Bush in the toilet, the Republicans are eating their own, and the co-opted MSM is tring to rally them with this kind of propaganda. How in the world would splitting off from the DNC benefit us?

People are sick of both parties.

How dare he get to know them better, find out what they're thinking and how politics applies in their personal lives. He ought to just give them a big handshake with his right hand and pick their pockets empty with his left.

What is this world coming to, that someone isn't a greedy cold-hearted ruthless bastard when they're a major player in politics. As my grandmother would say, "Well, I never!"

:sarcasm:

This looks like the info I have, like I linked above, and what I have somewhere on my harddrive.



http://www.dailykos.com/user/uid:4060

There was a write-up on this very topic midyear, when they started after him again. It is a different more populist kind of fundraising. Will take time.

week that the DNC was up to something. Now, I can see what it is. They want Dean gone and to start a movement to get him out of the Chairmanship. They think they can start cashing in all the Big Bucks from Repugs who will start running from the Repugs like rats from the ship soon. They want to cash in just like they've done before.

Bob Shrum is constantly on Tweety. Dean is rarely seen...so it's easy to understand what's going on, and it isn't good.

But appearance (or lack of) on talk shows is not an accurate indicator in this case. Shrum has appeared on Hardball for several months now, as has Joe Trippi, a Dean guy.

This does not mean anything other than Bob Shrum has nothing else to do. Truth be told, I would rather see him on Hardball than at the helm of a major campaign.

that the people who the Republican Criminal Cartel has been targeting are actually suffering serious financial hardship? I give what I can directly to individual candidates. Also, I'm furious that the DNC calls me every four days. I have asked them not to call. I donate online. Yet I have had at least thirty calls in the last two months.

Wouldn't it be a better yield to have them cold call people who they know haven't donated? With opinion polls as they are, ya think they may get some cash that way?

I'd prefer it this way.

1 dollar donation. Dean understands this.

The GOP has incumbency and represents the rich. Of course they can raise more money.

in a lot of dirty, illegally donated money.

John Atcheson's article on Common Dreams, "Snatching Defeat From The Jaws of Victory" may be relevant to this issue.

One of the things people with yellowdog fever don't seem to grok is that no matter how unfair the term "DINO" seems to you, a certain amount of party perfectionism is necessary. Specifically, to capitalize on the supposed self-destruction of the GOP, voters need to see someone on the other side of the fence who can be trusted to stop the GOP.

Simply put: all time spent insisting you don't think the GOP's such a bad guy is time spent ruining the chances of convincing voters the GOP are the bad guys. When you make a compromise, people don't remember you as reasonable, practical, or whatever -- they remember the other guy as being right (even if he wasn't).

I suspect at least half the non-voting public is waiting for (or at least would be pleasantly surprised by) a candidate to show up who can just say "Vote for me, because I'm not a crook out to screw you and they are." ... or in other words, Democrats as Aaron Sorkin imagined them to be instead of the ones we've really got. :eyes:

They are just trying to undermine Dean in the wake of all the Democratic victories on Tuesday. DNC fundraising is up by a significant margin. And results are what really count. Dean is getting results, and that has the rethugs and the rich GOP donors running scared.

I had been meaning to donate to the DNC for a little while, but I ran out of checks and was waiting for new ones to arrive. I couldn't wait any longer, so I just put it on my CC.

By the way, thank you SO MUCH Washington Post for the reminder that I needed to donate! Who knows how long I would have gone without your handy reminder. Mwa ha ha ha.

:woohoo: :applause: :patriot:

I read the article and besides a direct quote from Fazio's expressing that opinion, there was nothing else. It some riddled with anonymous quotes and "some people say" lines. It's merely fodder for the RW echo chamber.

It's a pure propaganda technique, used by Faux all the time. I wouldn't give this too much weight. When crunch time comes down, no amount of Rethug advertising $ will save their asses in '06. After Katrina, Rita, Wilma, Iraq, high gas and heating oil prices, all of the lies and scandals, the American people are starting to wake up. The cognitive dissonance is wearing off. The Rethugs are going to suffer hard next year and for many upcoming years. Their thousand year Reich is about to end.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200506170001

"The conservative media continues to falsely assert that Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Howard Dean is an ineffective fund-raiser. In the past week, Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes, New York Post columnist John Podhoretz, and Washington Times chief political correspondent Donald Lambro all cast Dean as a fund-raising failure. In fact, when compared with fund-raising in the most recent non-election year, Dean has raised more money in raw dollars, and more in comparison to the Republican National Committee (RNC), than did his predecessor.

As Media Matters for America has documented (here, here, and here), Dean raised $14.8 million between February and April 2005, versus $8.5 million raised by former DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe during the same time period in 2003. Dean has also raised more money than McAuliffe relative to RNC fund-raising. The RNC raised $32.4 million between February and April 2005, about 2.2 times the rate of the DNC; over the same period in 2003, the RNC's $25.7 million was more than three times what the Democrats raised. An article in the June 20 edition of Newsweek by chief political correspondent Howard Fineman and national correspondent Tamara Lipper noted how Dean has been effective at soliciting smaller donations"

More at the link.

The article is nothing but spinning against Dean.

1) Dean in 2005 has outraised McAuliffe in 2003 by about a third. It actually says so in the article.
2) The RNC fundraising in 2005 vs. 2003 has been basically flat.
3) Historically, the party that has the Presidency has a big fundraising advantage.
4) Historically, dems raise less than repukes, especially in hard money.

Conclusion: Dean is a lousy fundraiser???

I think we can count all the money the republicans are wasting of US taxpayers, or having to spend due to their screw ups, to the DNC also. Maybe it's phantom money -- but enough of it will earn the dems some votes against the republicans.

The rethugs may have more 'spending' money, but it will be against their advantage once it's spent and we need, say, healthcare and winter heating.

ghost writing for Howard Kurtz, who is feeding spin from his spinner wife. Does anyone especially now doubt this kinda thing goes on?

Geez..what a nearsighted doughbrain

From: Rapid Response Network <local@rapidresponsenetwork.org>
Date: Nov 12, 2005 4:39 PM
Subject: RAPID RESPONSE: Saturday 11/12/05
----------------------------
ISSUE
----------------------------

Democrats Losing Race For Funds Under Dean
By Chris Cillizza
Special to The Washington Post?Saturday, November 12,
2005
http://digbig.com/4fgkn

** THOUGHTS **

This headline and much of the article is quite
misleading by what is omitted... talk about turd
blossoms.

- Democratic National Committee fundraising is
actually up several million dollars versus last year
but Republican National Committee fundraising is
relatively flat

- Said another way, DNC money raising is up by about a
third, while RNC fundraising is only up by about 5%

- Given the historical fundraising imbalance... it's
rare that the DNC outraises the RNC, but
percentage-wise (if not in actual dollar amounts) the
DNC is doing just that under Chairman Howard Dean

- A little context: The national GOP has operations in
all 50 states to coordinate between the national party
and the state parties. Historically, the Democrats
have not had this infrastructure. Part of the reason
Howard Dean was elected chair of the national party
was to correct that imbalance. His focus over the past
few months (he hasn't even been chair for a year yet)
has been to focus on strategy, not to blindly raise
money with no reason.

- Some more context: Part of Chairman Dean's strategy
is to direct more fundraising directly toward state
parties to help them build their structures and farm
systems... If the monies are going directly to state
parties they're not going to the national party. Duh.

OTHER THOUGHTS...

Chairman Dean's philosophy is to have a party which
raises money from many people not just the wealthy
elite or the Establishment few. Given the number of
anonymous sources in this story it is surprising it
made it into publication (besides, I thought anonymous
sources were out of favor among journalists given what
happened in the lead-up to the Iraq Invasion).

This story seems to be little more than a plant,
either by conservatives who want to reassure their
base that there's money in the bank or by
Establishment progressive consultants who are now out
of favor within the party structure (or both).

** ACTION **

You may want to ask why so many "anonymous" sources
were used for this story and why any sort of context
regarding past performance and/or the strategy of
building the infrastructure was ignored....

#1 - Washington Post reporters are available through
800.627.1150 or 202.334.6000. I'm sure the operator
can help you find Chris Cillizza.

#2 - The current Post Ombudsman is Michael Getler. You
can reach him by e-mail at ombudsman@washpost.com or
by phone at 202-334-7582.

#3 - Letters to the Editor letters@washpost.com or by
snail mail:
Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20071


----------------------------
ISSUE
----------------------------

Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument
By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers?Saturday, November 12,
2005
http://digbig.com/4fgkm

** THOUGHTS **

As mentioned briefly in yesterday's alert, this WaPo
story surmises that our conservative president's
speech defending his invasion of Iraq was not "wholly
accurate."

A shorter word for not "wholly accurate"?

"Fib." ("Lie" works too.)

** ACTION **

Check your local media to make sure they are reporting
not only on the president's speech but also the
progressives' response (plus the full background --
such as, according to Bob Woodward, the Prince of
Saudi Arabia having more intel than Congress before
the US invaded Iraq).

Write a letter to the editor with your own thoughts on
"rewriting history" and being not "wholly accurate"...


----------------------------
ISSUE
----------------------------

U.S. sends signal on value of television
$3 billion planned for viewers to buy digital
converters
By William Neikirk
Chicago Tribune senior correspondent
Published November 12, 2005
http://digbig.com/4fgkk

** THOUGHTS **

Conservatives want to cut Katrina aid, health care,
food, education, children's and a whole host of other
decent, neighborly programs that help Americans in
need... yet they can find it in their "compassionate"
conservative hearts to scrounge together $3 billion
for converter boxes so the needy don't go without when
TV signals go all-digital.

What?! You can't eat Martha Stewart's cooking shows.
"Grey's Anatomy" and "ER" don't help you when you're
sick or hurt. And the only TV shows you can learn from
(like those at PBS such as Sesame Street and others
for the young or NOVA and Now for the mature) are
under constant attack as it is from corporatists and
right-wing fundamentalists.

Just as long as Bridges to Nowhere get built in Alaska
I guess this sort of twisted priority making is ok in
conservative fantasyland.

** ACTION **

Make sure your local and national media are on this
story too. Write to reporters and call editors.

What are your two cents about this $3 billion?


----------------------------
FYI
----------------------------

**
Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis
(Hardcover Book)?by Jimmy Carter
http://digbig.com/4fgkj

++ Being Mr. Nice Guy only gets you so far these
days...


____________________________________________
Support your RR team!

Tell your friends about us and let 'em know where to
sign up:
http://www.rapidresponsenetwork.org

Become a volunteer
http://www.rapidresponsenetwork.org/volunteer.shtml
or donate
http://www.rapidresponsenetwork.org/donate.shtml

____________________________________________
Rapid Response Network (RR) is a group of volunteers
dedicated to advancing the principles of balance and
truthfulness in the media. RR is currently filing for
501c4 status as a non-profit organization.

To contact us: us@rapidresponsenetwork.org
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
us-unsubscribe@rapidresponsenetwork.org
____________________________________________

To contact your elected representatives:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/
*
League of Women Voters Media email database:
http://www.capwiz.com/lwv/dbq/media/
*
TV news addresses: http://digbig.com/4bqmq
*
Addresses for major U.S. daily publications/wire
services/weekly publications: http://digbig.com/4cqge
*
Major publication addresses by state:
http://digbig.com/4bwxw

Enlightening...

Whenever the GOP is in trouble, they will put this shit out there to dismay us. They are now extremely vulnerable. I smell blood.

often, esp at the end of this year. You'll have a clean slate to donate again next year. Dean has been nurishing the grass roots of the DEM party. And just a thought. I don't care how much money you spend... IT'S THE VOTE THAT COUNTS. Let's work on voting reform too.

than the Dems.

We are DEMS... We are the POOR.


I give to the DNC every month! 20 bucks...

what do you bet Pumpkinhead will quote from this article?

Is this some kind of setup?

The only reason they want Howard on there is to dog him anyway. You would think he would just get smart and then just let em have it with both barrels so they never want to invite him back again

Why would anyone want to put themselves on the defensive when they should be on the offensive? Anybody with even a pea brain (like me even ) knows what a gig with MTP is all about.

Howard, you cannot serve two causes, it's either the DNC or fame and fortune, there is nothing in the middle. The whoredom that is corporate media knows no shame and hasn't found a low it wouldn't stoop to :shrug:

I saw Dean on (I think it was) Meet the Press this past Sunday. He pointed out that the previous person filling his position was outdone in fund raising by 3 to 1. So Dean being at 2 to 1 is actually an improvement. Repubs always out raise the Democrats so comparing Dean specifically to the Repubs doesn't mean much. The comparison between Dean and his predecessor is much more valid. I think this spin shows that Dean scares the neo-cons and they are trying to get the Dems to dump him.

send in your $20 or whatever and with 80,000 registered members of DUers that's over a million dollars right there. The bond idea is really good. I'm signing up today. In jest, I wonder if this is a fund raising plan of the DC?

with the coming elections. One problem that dogs even loyal Dems is the sheer volume of solicitation one receives after even one modest contribution. It creates donation freeze, I believe, but a concentrated 2006 appeal will thaw it out.

The main problem is in early development of candidates and campaigns. I bet this is where the most pain and danger is being felt, obviated by the
fearsome swing toward the Dems in public sentiment. Perhaps both would be served by some early passion of their(Dem elected leadership) own in unified fashion that unlocks the floodgates held back by GOP propaganda(the Dems don't stand for anything, they are not an option).
And get talent not afraid of going against big money or anything. These would often be the new blood the party desperately requires.