Why aren't Dems raising cash on-line?

I remember during the 2004 election when candidates were emailing their supporters asking for cash every other week. We raised a ton of it. Why aren't we doing that now? The midterms are less than a year away, why aren't we having massive campaign donation drives?

Should we start?

raising cash. I was solicitied and sent my donation on line.

The party should be doing more. We raised more than $100 million on-line in less than a year (later 2003-early 2004), why aren't we repeating that success?

Have you purchased your Democracy Bond (monthly donation -- as little as $10)

http://www.democrats.org/democracybonds.html

I get emails almost every day asking for funds. You need to sign up in order to get the emails, DNC, Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, Clark, Edwards; they all ask for money on various occasions.

georgia doesn't have party registration. i once voted in a republican primary(to vote against the incumbent) and i still get their solicitations (since 1992).

The OP wants to know why he/she isn't getting fundraising emails so I answered that. If you don't want to suport your party, don't. Make the rest of the Dem Party support you through Howard's 50 state strategy; just like we do with the taxes. Gads.

i do support the party but we will never beat the gop in fundraising unless we let people know what they can do to help.

First you object to beig solicited, now you say people need to know what to do to help. :shrug:

Dean can't raise any money...God I hate that witch.

I'm not attacking Dean's ability to raise cash here. Dean supporters shouldn't be so defensive about that...THAT'S NOT MY INTENSION.

I guess I just expected we'd be doing more, and having more success raising money from the internet. After all, we only have $5.5 million cash on hand. This is targetted towards all Democrats.

We have lists with over 30 million people on it. Maybe we need a new "sales pitch" but there isn't the urgency looking ahead at the 2006 midterms. We can't have a 50 state strategy without cash. We need to go out to people, not wait for people to come to us. We need to send out messages - maybe set up a website - explaning why 2006 is so important. Why we need their money. How together, we can win the whole thing.

That's all i'm saying.

We should set a target for $100 million (not necessarily for the DNC) but for any group which then transfers that money to Democratic candidates. If we raised $100 million, that means we could give $1 million to 100 different Congressional candidates. Strategically, we would force the GOP to spread out their funds as well.

Then we need a national message. Two or three domestic issues. A strong AND UNIFIED response to Iraq and terrorism. If we do this, I don't see how we lose.

Oh, I get what she means, she means that the Dean is not dirty with taking
cash from Casino Jack, too bad they can't smear him with Abramoff's money.

even tho her reelection seems to be a shoo in she sends national mail looking for
cash. Now, why would she solicit money in California for her senate campaign?

Because it is NOT for her senate campaign and instead for her presidential campaign
and she is being deceitful? Can she keep left over cash and use it for her
presidential campaign?

Why would she give free Hillary in NY bumper stickers to people in CA in hopes of
getting cash? Believe it or not, voters registered in CA cannot vote for Hillary

Msongs
www.msongs.com/dean2008.htm

Nobody comes to Portland unless they're running for President or are on the post-political speechifying circuit.

She knows about the money Dean has raised. She knows it very well.

this will help deter corruption, the fat cats will not know who to support, it will no
longer be: My buddy, my buddy and me.

and introduce legislation that would do it, including public financing of campaigns, and baning lobbyists from serving as campaign managers for Congressmen. It's not the free lunches, stupid!

I read or heard somewhere in the past few days that Barney Frank will soon be introducing such legislation for public financing of campaigns.

If Democrats make plain they are going to really fight for and represent us in Washington, they will be able to raise a ton of money in small donations to win the mid-terms, and then implement real election and campaign reform.

Why not try it? Go down fighting!

I think we will see the emergence of a large angry electorate, the peaceful days are over,
all major legislation is going to get the hairy eyeball on the homefront. The free lunch
for our congress is over. Also if the Dems raise 100 mil from the people and 30 million
from the lobbyists, they will not be following the lobbyists like indebted servants.

Matalin has been mentioned on a number of "target lists" that have been rumored to have been used by Fitzgerald in the Plame investigation.

I'm sure she's scared as hell (and perhaps Carville as well, which is probably why he stood next to her today) with the impending political storm that will (hopefully) push the corporate money bots (like both her and Carville) out of our government.

but what does that actually mean, the withering away of the 2 party system, major corruption
and suppresion of the vote to support corruption in the highest level of our government. These crimes will not go away, there will be just as much self-interest to steal 06 and 08
as there was in 02 and 04.

I'm holding back any donations to the party until they show that they can be counted to NOT follow what the DLC and corporate America wants done. I don't want to waste my money, and will donate money to other more progressive lobbyist groups instead, that hopefully will wield a bigger stick to demand getting rid of corporate influences!

If the congress critters would start to show some reasonable degree of independence from special interest campaign finance influence, I'd rethink my feelings about funding them. But for now, I think we need to be tough to make sure they get the right message about who we demand will take power in this country once we kick the Rethugs out! This isn't just about getting rid of Republicans. It's about getting rid of corporate fascism in our government, and they can't be a part of that equation to get my money!

I am tired of them, this administration will be known as the party of 1,000 cronies,
don't they ever finish handing off contracts and posts to "special friends."

Not a dime. If there ever was a time to exercise the right to filibuster, it is now.

If Dems can't see the writing on the wall{in bold print)...finding representatives who do, would be my next objective.

One qualfier after another, that's all I've heard for a year now. Pick some group, some person, somewhere, and support them. With your money and your mouth and your feet.

I guarantee if they do filibuster, the same crowd would be right back here in a month saying they aren't going to donate unless Dems do the fuck-you dance on the White House lawn.

In my mind, on the *key* issues, the Dems HAVE to support the people, NOT corporate special interests, or our money is being WASTED on them if we aren't putting conditions on our giving it to them. Hey we are vocal about our needs for them to get our money, but make no mistake about it, those special interests are making FAR MORE demands for these guys to do their bidding behind closed doors than we are. They've been taking our votes *and* money for granted up to this point. I say that we play more hardball from this point forward before giving them money now.

It's one thing to reward candidates you feel are taking an egalitarian position in compromising between different viewpoints of their various *people* constituents. I can accept some degree of compromise there. If all of those people are giving relatively equal amounts of contributions to these pols that I do, I then will feel that it is the candidate's own efforts to take the proper position on issues that he sees fit and that satisfy a majority of his constituents, not just for who gives him the mos money.

If we have folks selling out to the credit card companies to vote for the bankruptcy bill, arguably against just about all of their constituents' interests, that is the kind of candidate I feel that it is a TOTAL waste to donate money too. There's no way I can donate as much money as some of these special interests do, and therefore I won't be *heard*, even if I give some money, versus the aforementioned type of candidate, who I'm just trying to make sure has an adequate amount of money to run effectively, not who's playing the "who's got the most money" game on me.

The Dems have a long way to go still to get rid of the special interest corruptors. Voting against Alito would be a strong message by this party that they want to go back to servicing their real constituents that they're supposed to represent, not the special interests (who are lining up to see Alito get confirmed).

It was progressive who made Dean's online fund raising so successful. And all progressives get is backhanded these days by the so called "leadership."

They've been wholly ineffectual- not even giving the pretense of standing up for traditional Democratic values. Harry Reid has been a disaster- He simply can't control his DINO's or rally the party. He even crossed over and voted with the Republicans himself!

Filibuster Alito, and that might change. Punt again- and you've demoralized your base. The very groups who would not only fund you, but be in the trenchs working for a nationalized campaign.

by Mehlman.

Think this is a coincidence?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2383958#2384255

Secondly, I see the Dems acting in a very coordinated fashion these days. Last week was a good example.

beyond disaster.

Not as insanely much as the corrupt GOP...but they are.