« FL-Sen: Friday's the Deadline | Main | NY-20: Sweeney Blutarsky At It Again »

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

DCCC's Red to Blue List Cut by Six

Posted by DavidNYC

What the heck is this? The Hill is saying that six names on the DCCC's original Red to Blue list are being axed. If these six names (Darcy Burner, John Cranley, Jill Derby, Kirsten Gillibrand, Tessa Hafen, Harry Mitchell) had never been included, I wouldn't be complaining now.

But this just looks sloppy, to put out a list only to cut it down later. It also raises uncomfortable - and totally unfair - questions for these six campaigns. I'm sure that the GOP opponents of all six are putting out press releases right now which say, "So-and-so loses DCCC support!" It's especially harsh since several of these candidates are on the lower end of fundraising totals (compared to the other names on the original list). So that means these are the campaigns which need help the most.

Mostly, this flub makes us look like a bunch of pikers. Look, I'm glad the DCCC is claiming that these folks will be added in the next round, but that supposedly isn't happening until sometime in June. Rahm Emanuel may be a lot of things, but I don't think he's inattentive to detail. So I ask again, what the hell happened here? Why the screw up? I'm hoping that maybe The Hill got this story wrong.

(Thanks to Political Wire.)

Posted at 05:30 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Did you see that Rasmussin has Trauner only 4% down on Cubin?

Posted by: mullymt [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 9, 2006 06:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Sigh. Sounds like John Kerry pulling out of Missouri and Arkansas five months before the election revisited. I sure hope this story is wrong. Emanuel would have to be insane to try to sell a "northeastern strategy" narrative at the same time as he cuts off Kirsten Gillibrand's funding. We can't even blame ugly internal polls on this since Jill Derby did surprisingly well in the poll released just last month for NV-02. Whatever the case, consciously shrinking the battlefield this far before the election is a very ominous sign.

Posted by: Mark [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 9, 2006 06:20 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I think there is some blame to be shared here. Still, the campaign are jumping to action immediately.

Here is Washington the local blogosphere struck back.

Here's an excerpt from www.horsesass.org :

The DCCC always intended to roll out the program in staggered waves, so as to concentrate the focus of donors on small groups of candidates, thus maximizing contributions. And the chronology of the rollout has absolutely nothing to do with the priority of the individual races.

Bedingfield confirms that Burner most definitely is in Red to Blue – a program she describes as “very exclusive” – and that Burner is scheduled to roll out on June 1st… perfectly positioned to extract the maximum benefit from the program during the crucial, end-of-quarter, fundraising push. Burner has been personally assured by DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel that WA-08 remains a top priority, and that she will receive all of the support she has been promised.

And if that’s not clear enough, DCCC communications director Bill Burton just emailed me the following:

Darcy Burner is running one of the strongest Democratic campaigns in the country. The DCCC has included her in our Red to Blue program as a sign of our confidence that she is the candidate for change who will unseat Dave Reichert in the fall. The Red to Blue program is staggered in order to direct as much donor attention as possible to each qualifying campaign. Darcy Burner’s extraordinary campaign qualified easily for the program and will receive the full force of DCCC financial and strategic aid.

Posted by: little_birdy [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 9, 2006 06:46 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

All I'm saying is that this just looks bad and amateurish. It creates a negative story where there should be (and is) none. I believe the DCCC will help Gillibrand, Burner, etc. And while I'd prefer now rather than later, a few weeks won't kill us.

But this whole roll-out and retraction just looks like amateur hour. What's more, it isn't even necessary. As long as the DCCC plans on doing something by June THIRTIETH (ie, there will be some clear showing on the candidates' FEC reports), then no one will ask any questions.

Posted by: DavidNYC [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 9, 2006 06:49 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Pragmatically, Cranley might be our best "pick up" hope in Ohio. This sucks.

Posted by: Ohanon [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 10, 2006 07:41 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

wow, and I thought we were doing so good. This looks really bad. I agree, they should have done nothing and just funded a couple dollars. The press wouldn't have even noticed.

Posted by: bpilch [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 10, 2006 08:58 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I can't believe that he's taking John Cranley off the list for now. This comes after he said, 'If national Democrats had paid attention to his first run he'd be the incumbent now. Sorry, but neither Tessa Hafen, nor Jill Derby have any chance whatsoever. Porter nearly beat Shelly Berkley in 2000, despite running in a really Democratic District. He then won fairly handily in a newly created Swing District, has 1.5 million COH, is a moderate I personally like, and is a classic overperforming GOP representative. Remember, Kerry wasn't even able to win this district. All I can say, Eric Massa, Joe Sestak, and Kirsten Gillenbrand better be on the list for the second round of Red to Blue

Posted by: ArkDem [TypeKey Profile Page] at May 11, 2006 09:00 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment