Dean Under Fire From Party Dems; Nearly All Cash Spent

[McCarrens]

Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are privately bristling over Howard Dean’s management of the Democratic National Committee and have made those sentiments clear after new fundraising numbers showed he has spent nearly all the committee’s cash and has little left to support their efforts to gain seats this cycle, ROLL CALL reports.

Congressional leaders were furious last week when they learned the DNC has just $5.5 million in the bank, compared to the Republican National Committee’s $34 million.

Senate and House Minority Leaders Harry Reid (Nev.) and Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), along with the Senate and House campaign committee chairmen Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have made their concerns -- directly or indirectly -- known to Dean, claims the paper.

Emanuel was particularly upset last week upon seeing the latest DNC numbers.

“A lot of people are scratching their heads as to what’s going on,” said one senior Democratic aide.

Another Democratic source familiar with the party fundraising apparatus said there is “obvious displeasure” among the leaders.

http://drudgereport.com/flashhd.htm

<I>I thought I read something the other week about Dean bragging about how much money the DNC had? Oh well.

Also, I'd like to see a lib attack the content of this post instead of the fact that it came from Drudge. </I>

[Warham]

hehe.

Rush even mentioned this today.

It must be burning a hole in Dean's pocket.

[FORD]

More misleading bullshit from the Republican propagandists, supported by the DLC whores.

As I have previously mentioned, Dean set records for off year party contributions, and he did so from individual, not corporate donors.

He also established local party structures in all 50 states. That probably took some money, but that would be an investment, not a loss.

Why would Republicans be so concerned if Dean is bad with money? Wouldn't that work to their advantage??

Reality is that the Pukes are scared shitless of Dean, as they have been since 2003.

And the DLC, likewise, is scared shitless that Democrats are waking up to the reality that corporate funding has not done one goddamned thing to benefit their party, but instead has made it a clone of the Repuke neocons.

Only the treasonous bastards of AIPAC are a bigger cancer on our political system than corporate control. But that's entirely another discussion.

[diamondD]

So instead of posting actual numbers that dispute it, you just call it propaganda?

Who said the Republicans are concerned? Nobody but you suggested that. The tone of the article is about Democrats being concerned. That wasnt' even a good try on the spin.


You can call it misleading all you want, and try to focus the attention on something else all you want. But 34 to 5 million isn't a good sign for anyone. And the blame will go on Howard Dean, no matter how righteous you make him out to be.

[4moreyears]

I Love Howard Dean. Did he invent the Internet too???

[McCarrens]

Originally posted by FORD
More misleading bullshit from the Republican propagandists, supported by the DLC whores.

<I>I told you he would first attack the source, not the content</I>

As I have previously mentioned, Dean set records for off year party contributions, and he did so from individual, not corporate donors.

<I>I told you I thought I had seen something along those lines. But getting lots of money is only good if you aren't spending more than you bring in.</I>

He also established local party structures in all 50 states. That probably took some money, but that would be an investment, not a loss.

Why would Republicans be so concerned if Dean is bad with money? Wouldn't that work to their advantage??

<I>It's just basic reporting. Where does that story give opnion? Do you not want the media to be fair and honest?</I>

Reality is that the Pukes are scared shitless of Dean, as they have been since 2003.

<I>Everyone Rupublican I know LOVES Dean and wish he had run against Bush in 2004. The only thing better than him running for president is him leading the party.</I>

And the DLC, likewise, is scared shitless that Democrats are waking up to the reality that corporate funding has not done one goddamned thing to benefit their party, but instead has made it a clone of the Repuke neocons.

Only the treasonous bastards of AIPAC are a bigger cancer on our political system than corporate control. But that's entirely another discussion.

<I>I only addressed the things in your post that weren't personal opinion and fictitious bullshit.</I>

[McCarrens]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
I Love Howard Dean.

See? I told you so! Dean is the greatest thing since Reagan to happen to the Republican party!

[Nickdfresh]

Thing is, DRUDGE seems to have a lot of completely constructed bullshit these days...

It's tough to take anything off that site with much more than a grain of salt...

[Guitar Shark]

I'm sure it's Diebold's fault somehow. :ssh:

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Thing is, DRUDGE seems to have a lot of completely constructed bullshit these days...

It's tough to take anything off that site with much more than a grain of salt...


Then what are the numbers?

[thome]

Your missing the point the question is how long until the dems fire back with.

Hot off the presses!!!!!! dit dit dit dit ..........

Republican Windfall money came from Abramoff Killer Slam to the
right wing BCE ....dit dit dit .... Washington in Turmoil....Impeach Bush


Hah! beat cha to it ..Winner by a knock out

[DrMaddVibe]

http://www.kemporama.com/wavs/howard_dean_short1.wav

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by diamondD
Then what are the numbers?

They're actually not much better..

The Rupubs have a couple mill. less, and the Dems have 7.3 Million in the coffers..

Fine.

But who are the Republicans running in '08?

I mean, who's the money gonna' go to?

McCAIN is the only guy to win anything, and the illiterates and religious-right will never allow him to be nominated...

And if it's just about money, then you're a whore anyways...

[Warham]

Who are the Democrats going to run? Hillary? LMAO!

51% of the people refuse to vote for her, and we are two years away. Just think what two more years of her talking will do to those numbers.

Who else can they trot out? Kerry? Pelosi? Reid?

Democrats have a slim and none chance of regaining the Oral Office.

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
They're actually not much better..

The Rupubs have a couple mill. less, and the Dems have 7.3 Million in the coffers..

Fine.

But who are the Republicans running in '08?

I mean, who's the money gonna' go to?

McCAIN is the only guy to win anything, and the illiterates and religious-right will never allow him to be nominated...

And if it's just about money, then you're a whore anyways...


I can pretty much guarantee you that chances are, no matter who is on each ticket, I'll have to hold my nose when I pull the lever. I don't think either one is gonna offer up someone who's gonna get me excited about giving them my vote.


And running an election campaign is about money.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
Who are the Democrats going to run? Hillary? LMAO!

She'll destroy anyone not named McCain...

And you know it.


51% of the people refuse to vote for her, and we are two years away. Just think what two more years of her talking will do to those numbers.

Not in New York state...

(BTW, that's what they said when she announced she was running for Senator.)


Who else can they trot out? Kerry? Pelosi? Reid?

Democrats have a slim and none chance of regaining the Oral Office.

Biden, Obama, Clark...

[diamondD]

Don't forget Rudy. He'll pull a hell of a lot more of the vote in than you give him credit for.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by diamondD
I can pretty much guarantee you that chances are, no matter who is on each ticket, I'll have to hold my nose when I pull the lever. I don't think either one is gonna offer up someone who's gonna get me excited about giving them my vote.

So how is that new, LOL?

I'd vote McCAIN to be honest, but there is no other Republican even worth considering. I seriously would vote for Hillary as a President like I did for Senator. (did I just admit that?) I voted for her because the Republican'ts arrogantly put up a corrupt, douche-bag stiff (Rick Lazio) against her, I'll do it again...

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
Don't forget Rudy. He'll pull a hell of a lot more of the vote in than you give him credit for.

The only way Rudy Guiliani wins the Republican nomination is if the party completely cleanses itself of the entire BCE/war profiteering/Religious Reich machinery which has controlled it since the Eisenhower years.

And if the few sane Republicans that are left had any brains, that's exactly what they would do. But I doubt they would get it done by 2008, especially with nobody in the GOP opposing Chimpy (at least not in public)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by diamondD
Don't forget Rudy. He'll pull a hell of a lot more of the vote in than you give him credit for.

So a guy that lived with a gay couple, while mayor, is going to be allowed RNC nomination?

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
She'll destroy anyone not named McCain...

And you know it.



Not in New York state...

(BTW, that's what they said when she announced she was running for Senator.)



Biden, Obama, Clark...

Hillary won't win for one reason. She's female. Shockingly un-PC, isn't it?

Biden doesn't have a chance. Obama, nope. Clark, no way, not after he wouldn't trash Michael Moore in '04 when he had the chance.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
So how is that new, LOL?

I'd vote McCAIN to be honest, but there is no other Republican even worth considering. I seriously would vote for Hillary as a President like I did for Senator. (did I just admit that?) I voted for her because the Republican'ts arrogantly put up a corrupt, douche-bag stiff (Rick Lazio) against her, I'll do it again...

Seeing as how McCain is pretty much a moderate Democrat playing a Republican, that doesn't surprise me coming from you.

What party are you registered under anyway?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
Hillary won't win for one reason. She's female. Shockingly un-PC, isn't it?

Biden doesn't have a chance. Obama, nope. Clark, no way, not after he wouldn't trash Michael Moore in '04 when he had the chance.

So, who will win? And why?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
Seeing as how McCain is pretty much a moderate Democrat playing a Republican, that doesn't surprise me coming from you.

Specifically, how? You mean he's fiscally responsible?


Good boy Karl's little puppy...



What party are you registered under anyway?

I think you know the answer to that question...

[Warham]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
So, who will win? And why?

Not sure who will win unless I know the DNC nomination.

I actually think George Allen has a good chance of getting the RNC nomination. I've heard many, many prominent Republicans that have alot of pull mention his name when it comes to picking a favorite in two years. Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[diamondD]

I couldn't vote for Hillary, no matter who she' running against. She's been around in my voting climate since I could vote.

Dear God, get this woman out of my political life...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
Not sure who will win unless I know the DNC nomination.

I actually think George Allen has a good chance of getting the RNC nomination. I've heard many, many prominent Republicans that have alot of pull mention his name when it comes to picking a favorite in two years. Wouldn't surprise me in the least.

No, that's the guy YOU WANT to get the nomination...\

And he'll never win a national election...

[Warham]

No, I've heard Rush mention his name numerous times, and I've heard a few others, like Matalin mention him as well.

I'd love to see him get the nom. He's a throwback, and you know that he's a diehard conservative. My kind of guy. He's got the Southern vote locked up, since he's from Virginia.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
Hillary won't win for one reason. She's female. Shockingly un-PC, isn't it?

Biden doesn't have a chance. Obama, nope. Clark, no way, not after he wouldn't trash Michael Moore in '04 when he had the chance.

Hillary won't win because she's pissed off more people on the left than she has on the right. There's no base for her.

Biden.... never in a million years.

Obama - possibly a great candidate down the road, too inexperienced now.

Clark - great deal of foreign affairs experience, no political experience. He'll be part of the next administration somehow. Possibly Vice President, Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense, which he's obviously well qualified for. But due to no political experience, I don't see him at the top of the ticket.

And Clark had no reason to turn on Michael Moore. Why would you shit on someone who endorsed your campaign so early in the race?

The strongest ticket I can see for 2008, out of all the names currently being speculated, is Gore/Clark.

[Warham]

Al Gore?

hehehe.

FORD, you are making this too easy on us.

[diamondD]

So does Al only get one term? All I heard for 4 years was that he was President Gore...

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
So does Al only get one term? All I heard for 4 years was that he was President Gore...

President Gore was elected, but the fascists kept him from serving in office. So he hasn't had his two terms yet.

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by FORD
President Gore was elected, but the fascists kept him from serving in office. So he hasn't had his two terms yet.


He NEVER will either!:D