Tim Kaine

Not sure if he is a craptacular DNC Chair or that he's just a sitting governor asd thus ins't making a lot of noise.  I'd bet a lot of people don't even know who he is but everyone knows who Howard Dean adn Michael Steele are.  Is there anyway we can get Dr. Dean back?

---

by: admnok @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22:30 PM UTC

I Doubt That

Dean is not coming back, no matter how much the bloggers want him to. Obama put Kaine in that position, and he's there to stay. But what I'm really disappointed in is the debt accumulated by the DCCC and DSCC, while the Republican organizations are reporting no debt.  

---

by: Don't Tase Me, Bro! @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 14:08:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

...Really?

Dean was raising 3-5 million a month as DNC Chair and was getting blown out by the RNC if I remember right.  Tim Kaine is raising over 6 million a month and keeping it close in a worse off economy?  I'll take it.  Especially considering the dropoff from the DSCC.  

---

by: JeremiahTheMessiah @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 14:33:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm happy as long as he keeps

up a national party. All that money poured into the DGA and DLCC and various state party apparatus's has really rebuilt the local Democratic party in vast areas of the country. States like Missouri, Montana, Virginia, North Carolina, they are all examples of its success it capitilizing on Democratic strength.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 18:24:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

plus: Kaine is only DNC Chair part time. He'll probably do even

better once he can focus full time at the job. (Although I presume he has deputy chairs taking up the slack currently)

---

by: homerun @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 20:27:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Looking at the balance sheet numbers

Looking at Cash on Hand minus debt:

DCCC  10,738,064-4,666,667=6,071,397

NRCC 4,200,544

DCCC has an edge of 1,870,853

DSCC  6,900,000-2,900,000=4,000,000

NRCC  5,100,000

NRCC has an edge of 1,100,000

DNCC  15,344,560

RNCC  20,970,858

RNCC has an edge of 5,626,298

So, overall, the Democrats are behind on the balance sheet, but not by much at all.  If you add it all together, the Republican committees have (cash on hand minus debt) $30, 271,402, while the Democrats have 25,415,957, which gives the Republican committees a total edge of 4,855,445.

In August alone, the Dems raised $12,395,144 from the 3 committees.  So realistically, our balance sheet is only a little behind the GOP at this time.

My major concerns are that we need more money than the GOP because we have more seats that are vulnerable than they do.  We must start raising some serious cash if we want to defend these seats against a GOP wave.

Overall, the Democratic party is in a lot better position than we were 4 years ago.  We need to strengthen our balance sheet so we can "lay it on" the GOP in 2010.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 14:12:45 PM UTC

Our candidates

I think our candidates are rasing a nice chunk of money so that should help us out as well

---

by: admnok @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 14:33:36 PM UTC

What Were the Numbers Under Clinton?

Those would seem to be the relevant numbers to compare to Obama to see what we should expect of the DNC under a Democratic president.  

---

by: armand @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 15:51:17 PM UTC

I'm impressed by the deficit cut

$40m versus $4. DNC has cut the gap which is creditable considering the starting point.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 16:49:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Or even $4m

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 16:49:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Too hard to compare

For one, donation limits back then were $1000/person. But more importantly, pre-McCain-Feingold, large donors were encouraged to make huge lump-sum donations to state parties (remember soft money?). Democrats were more reliant on that system than Republicans, so I don't think comparing 1990s DNC/RNC and today's really works.

---

by: DavidNYC @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 02:27:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I read at Daily Kos that people are refusing to give the DSCC or DCCC any money

Until a health care bill is passed with a public option

I know progressives are large contributors to both, might this be why the DSCC and DCCC numbers are behind the NRSC and the NRCC numbers?

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

---

by: daman09 @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 17:41:42 PM UTC

I seriously doubt it

I say this as a fan of Dkos, but even as they like to think they are powerful, they are seriously delusional. ActBlue is great but in overall terms its fundraising is rather miniscule, only in certain races does it make a real difference. Truth is they want influence, they want to covince the public and win races but they don't want to open their wallets up too much. I mean the progressive grassroots could be raising 40-80 million a year at least for Democrats, at least. There are around 2-4 million such devoted activists, (though not all on the netroots), and if they were all to open their wallets to just a pathetically small amount of between 10-20 dollars, (or put in other terms three trips to Starbucks, or two tweleve packs, or their afternoon vending machine soda for one month), they could be driving a huge fundraising apparatus for the national party and actually become a truly driving force and if they truly cared and went up to 40 dollars over the course of the entire year Democrats would be awash in resoruces. And that's a conservative estimate, 2-4 million, the number of self-described liberal activists and diehard Democrats could possibly equal up to 7 or 8 million people. Put their money where the mouth is, the time and resources to stage one protest that accomplishes nothing could raise millions of dollars.

Me and David actually had an argument over this a long long time ago on Dkos ;) I stood up and demanded everyone who was their to complain to donate 5 dollars to a candidate on ACTBLUE and summarized close races and which candidates should get it, including a few non-progressives. So pretty much I was suggesting that the entire 100-500 thousand browsers on Dkos at that time actually donate, a situation which would have raised 2.5 million dollars for a group of 10 important candidates all at the cost personally of a week of sodas.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 18:34:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Indeed

Much easier to bitch and moan in front of your PC or laptop than it is to open your wallet.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 18:47:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yup. Surprised at the number of

critics I had on that post. I even laid out all the ways to save money to make the donation if you were tight or just lazy. I even noted that if you dumped your pocket change into a jar by the end of the month you'd have 5 dollars and could make that donation-that is microscopic the donation I was talking about was. For the price of a Michael Moore movie ticket you could all be funnelling millions of dollars into actually accomplishing. That was my point at least.

Anyway, his new movie was a little too preachy for me. I am a self-described capitilist in screwing whatever I can get out of the stupidity of the other 99% of the population and spending it however I want, and an ardent socialist in my view of the effiency and neccessity of society as a whole to care for and raise a convenient and high quality standard of living for those same idiots. I am a Capto-socialist ;)

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 18:53:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nothing over there surprises me anymore

Lots and lots of good, sensible people posting but unfortunately many more who refuse to see the forest for the trees.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 18:56:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am completely with them on healthcare

The illogicalness of it blows my mind. Support from the general public is there, its been proven more efficient, the current system is broken, America's healthcare system is overtaxing our resources, and a public option is already a compromise on what should be a universal healthcare program. Not only that but it will add jobs; the other insurance companies will have layoffs, but the federal government will be employing most of those employees as well not to mention new ones to cover the additional 47 million policies created by the plan.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 19:09:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mmmm

I will refrain from responding since I'll get in trouble for getting off topic.  

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 21:55:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

lol, regardless though

I am stringently pro public option. I'd rather even have a Universal plan. There is no reason to pay people to pay for your medical bills. It is so much more efficient as a government service, that is just common sense.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 22:04:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank you

---

by: DavidNYC @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 02:28:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have been saying no

to the DNC, DCCC and DSCC all year for precisely this reason: I am waiting to see whether anything useful happens on health care reform.

I have no idea how many other progressives are doing the same.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 11:13:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ex-Rep. Tauscher Was Big August DCCC Donor

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/ey...
Good job, Ellen.
Now if only some ex-Rep in Massachusetts, sitting on nearly $5M, could follow her example.

---

by: homerun @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 20:40:37 PM UTC