Why I will not be donating to the DNC, the DSCC or any other party fund

Hackett v. Brown, that's why.

With Brown as the party insider, I'm damned sure that he'll get some help from the party in the primary.

I cannot in good conscience do anything that runs any risk to result in hindering Paul Hackett's chances, thus, I will only be donating to individual candidates. I've got a horse in this race and I will do what I can to help Paul Hackett even though I do not live in Ohio.

Brown has done a lot for the party in Ohio, but I'm backing Hackett.

After the primaries, I'll reconsider.

Besides, the Dems haven't been doing much lately (as a group) to warrant sending them any money. When they start standing up as a rule, rather than an exception, to the powers that be, they'll deserve some money. Right now, most of them are still lying down and many are voting with the Repukes on issues near and dear to my heart. Forget it.

He would also make an excellent candidate.

But, he's a known quantity and could run in Ohio at any time. Hackett's notoriety is more immediate. He needs to strike while the iron is hot. Were I an Ohioan, I'd be supporting Hackett, too. Get him past DeWine, then use Brown later as a trump card, to remove whatever Republican may still be in office after the ax falls.

rahter than the guy who has been a public servent for the past 25 years?

from any moral or decent standpoint. I'm stating what I believe has the best chance of getting the greatest number of Democrats in office. In a few years, people will have forgotten Hackett. But they'll still know Brown. So run Hackett now against DeWine, then have Brown take out Voinovich in 2008.

I'm not as impassioned about Hackett v Brown (although it seems like a bonehead move) but when you give to the large umbrella organization you are basically trusting them to spend your money in the wisest way. For all you know they might have written your district off, an send your money to New York City (insert BBQ commercial cliche here, unless you are from New York City, in which case, congratulations, greatest city on the earth).

It's better to give it to candidates you like, then you know who's getting the money. That's my take anyway.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

and see if your being "damned sure" equates with reality before going off half cocked.

I'm not so teed off about Browns entrance into the race as you are, but I'm still a little bit miffed at his flip-flop on that.

What I'm more concerned about is that Brown, with his strong liberal voting record that I like, will not translate as well in the general
election to independants and moderate Republicans as Hackett might.

So Brown might win in the primary and lose to Dewine in the general. This I think is the question that needs to be considered carefully.

However, before throwing your weight behind not contributing to the DNC and the DSCC or any other party fund, I would suggest getting the facts first.

Edited to add....After all, Dean wasn't the pick of the DLC but of party activists like us. His contest every race strategy and his determination to build state parties is a good thing over all. If he can't raise the money to do it, then the DLC will be happy to return to the corporate tit.

from the blanket organizations in the form of endorsements from Democrats who were elected or will be re-elected in part with help from these funds. This is why I'm damned sure.

I donated to the DNC last year. I'll never do it again. Last year they proved to me they are not very wise with the money, thus my only option is to donate directly to candidates whom I support.

directly. I also give to the DNC because they recruit and train candidates at all levels and sustain the party structure that we will need to take back the House and Senate, the White House, Governor's seats and state legislatures.

them spending their money.

unregenerate late 2003 Dean camp behavior?

What ever happened to that old definition of insanity- repeating the same actions in expectations of a different result?

I'd be seriously questioning my motivations if I were you. Narcissisms, vanity, and magical thinking tend to be bad reasons to back one candidate over the other, unless you're sincerely and honestly sure that that's what a majority (or moral plurality) of the electorate responds affirmatively to when election day rolls around.

:eyes:

And I still see that it's not just that Hackett Is Good, it's that Brown Is Evil for you.

Being that you're in Ohio, I guess you're broadly informed and have carefully and comprehensively dealt with the evidence.

Oh, wait, you're not in Ohio. And you're minimally/trivially informed. And you've dismissed Sherrod Brown pretty much out of hand.

It's not your opinion that annoys me. It's your flaunting the...unwise...rationale that is offensive to me.

He went back on his word to Hackett. That causes me to dismiss him out of hand.

If he wins the primary, fine, I won't be donating to his campaign, nor will I be donating to an organizaation which could be donating to his campaign.

If a man is not worth his word, he is worthless.

even if that happened as you portray it, which is in doubt. And I come from people who endlessly moralize about other people keeping and breaking their word.

Mike DeWine's Senate seat didn't pass into Hackett's possession virtue of Brown saying he wasn't running at this point, nor was it taken from him by Brown saying he had reconsidered.

Reminds me of some little adage about not splitting the bearskin before you actually bag the bear.

which is why he asked Brown prior to making any final decisison.

Sherrod Brown is not worth his word, so IMO, he does not deserve the nomination. Had he been honest and told Hacket either and unqualified yes or told him he still had not made up his mind, I could respect that and would have no problems.

He did not.

But I donate to the DNC: Got one of Chairman HoHo's Democracy Bonds.

And I also donated to Paul Hackett during his last run (got a lovely postcard thanking me).

Now, I'm a long ways from Ohio so I don't really know the personalities but it seems to me that Brown is to the left of Hackett so I'm a little surprised at the lack of respect he seems to have on DU. Hackett on the other hand demonstrated that he is a fighter, and he ran a good race for Congress. Frankly, I'd leave it up the Democratic voters of Ohio to choose in their primary.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/14/181051/30

I can't argue with the guy who I support on this one.

I'm in the race. My message to Sherrod Brown is: "the water's nice, come on in."

...if we refuse to fund our party? We are giving them an argument for their position if there's no other way to get funding, aren't we?

I mean, you have a valid reason from withholding your money, and I'm not saying you shouldn't, I'm just wondering, maybe worrying, aloud.

Personally, I'm so broke, I'm not giving out a goddamn cent to anyone, so I'm not buying much influence myself.

as well as select candidates around the country.

I don't favor giving to large groups, but favor giving directly to candidates or specific causes.



http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst