Posted on 12/08/2018 5:49:04 PM PST by Kaslin
The Democratic National Committee has a few concerns heading into 2019. For starters, their cash flow is not even in the same stratosphere as the Republicans' haul. The RNC raised $227.2 million in 2018 to the DNC's nearly $120 million. Secondly, their voter data infrastructure appears to be crumbling. A new strategy pushed by DNC leadership would compile all the voter data from Democratic groups into a single, for-profit entity. It is a strategy that is "modeled" after their Republican counterpart, Politico explains. But, the shift is causing a major argument between the national committee and the Democratic state parties, who are wondering why they should agree to give up this control of the voter database.
But in interviews with more than two dozen state party chairs, vice chairs and executive directors, the response to the proposal being pushed by DNC Chairman Tom Perez and his leadership team ranged from skeptical to outright hostile. Both sides agree that being able to swap data seamlessly with outside groups is necessary, but they’re at loggerheads over the best way to make it happen.
“I’m not willing to give up one of our most important tools to a group of people who have never even worked on a campaign before,” Trav Robertson, chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said of Perez’s team. (Politico)
"There’s definitely, ‘what’s in it for us?’ questions still there,” added Valdez Bravo, a vice chairman of the Oregon Democratic Party.
The committee is also considering cutting a $10 million grant program to state parties.
State parties have some justification for their skepticism after the bias the DNC showed in the 2016 presidential election. They essentially rolled out the red carpet for Hillary Clinton, to the detriment of Bernie Sanders's campaign. Former DNC interim chair Donna Brazile wrote a whole book about it and said the bias at the committee was so rampant it made her weep.
The Democratic National Committee has a few concerns heading into 2019. For starters, their cash flow is not even in the same stratosphere as the Republicans' haul. The RNC raised $227.2 million in 2018 to the DNC's nearly $120 million. Secondly, their voter data infrastructure appears to be crumbling. A new strategy pushed by DNC leadership would compile all the voter data from Democratic groups into a single, for-profit entity. It is a strategy that is "modeled" after their Republican counterpart, Politico explains. But, the shift is causing a major argument between the national committee and the Democratic state parties, who are wondering why they should agree to give up this control of the voter database.
But in interviews with more than two dozen state party chairs, vice chairs and executive directors, the response to the proposal being pushed by DNC Chairman Tom Perez and his leadership team ranged from skeptical to outright hostile. Both sides agree that being able to swap data seamlessly with outside groups is necessary, but they’re at loggerheads over the best way to make it happen.
“I’m not willing to give up one of our most important tools to a group of people who have never even worked on a campaign before,” Trav Robertson, chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said of Perez’s team. (Politico)
"There’s definitely, ‘what’s in it for us?’ questions still there,” added Valdez Bravo, a vice chairman of the Oregon Democratic Party.
The committee is also considering cutting a $10 million grant program to state parties.
State parties have some justification for their skepticism after the bias the DNC showed in the 2016 presidential election. They essentially rolled out the red carpet for Hillary Clinton, to the detriment of Bernie Sanders's campaign. Former DNC interim chair Donna Brazile wrote a whole book about it and said the bias at the committee was so rampant it made her weep.
“Start counting the votes now. Where’s the problem?”
And stop, perhaps, some time in February 2021.
The democrats don’t need to bother doing anything. They have perfected voter fraud, and we are told, it is all perfectly legal. I wonder if they will allow any republicans to win at all, ever!
The Democrats have “ballot harvesting.”
They can get 3 votes for every real Democrat voter.
"Whatever"
We caught them with their pants down in 2016.
They fixed their broken Election Fraud Machines in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
They have a new super-weapon in Ballot Harvesting, along with air cover for it in the form of North Carolina.
We either beat them to a pulp over the impending attack on Trump, and then go after their Election Fraud weapons, or we're done here.
Hundreds of millions of dollars from just four billionaires is why they outraised us. In some races, they were outspending 3 and four to one, and still lost.
I hope that RINO Lamar Alexander of Tennessee will be replaced by a Conservative.
Hey! it's "Ballot Harvesting".
AWESOME when KKKalifornia DemoKKKrats do it in dozens of districts, BAD when Republicans do it in one district in North Carolina.
#Carolinafornia and The Big Orange County Steal
Even if united, the GOP is In trouble.
Divided, the GOP is In very big trouble.
The Democrats own Farcebook, twitter, and other big social media in addition to the press.
That’s a giant advantage.
The RNC needs a new chairman right now. Someone who can get the state parties to do their job.....or you’re fired.
... as well as the full and free services of the willing LMSM to carry their water.
Your full of it, but then you are from kalifornia where the Republicans lost greatly through voter fraud from the left.
No what happened is that Donald Trump ran.
He is completely unlike the GOP. Trump won, not the GOP.
If the GOP returns to their old self, they may never win again. Trump is what America needs. And more people like him.
We do not need to continue what the GOP has become. Not at all.
We need to become much more like Trump. And Trump needs to stop catering to the GOP, and start doing what he said he would do.
Now.
Look at Hillary and the corrupt Democrats, they outspent Trump *over* 2 to 1 across the board and much higher in some venues. Meg Whitman? The billionaire would spend more of her own fortune, more than anyone in history at the time, yet she couldn't buy the governors office in CA.
And why not ? You mean to tell me there are no billionaire conservo-libertarians? The notion is ludicrous.
Yes, exactly...which is unfortunate - for example, take the Senate race in Michigan. The final results indicate that race was quite winnable - the GOP candidate was virtually unfunded, and when he was finally able to get on the air and people started to see and hear from him, he rapidly starting closing the gap - he was far more than a generic GOP candidate. There are at least one million conservatives in this country (actually, a lot more than that) that would have been willing to chip in a mere $10 a piece to give John James a full campaign war chest. It just wasn't organized. Imagine the dynamics of the election if MT, WV, WI, MI, and MN candidates alone suddenly had $10 million or more appear in their campaign war chests instead of the relatively meager amounts they had as compared to their opponents. Those were all very winnable races with at least half-way decent candidates.
Plus the BILLIONS in in-kind contributions by media outlets masquerading as news programs and journalistic endeavors.
Trump was particularly gifted in the traditional retail politics “press the flesh” campaigning. Not every candidate - in fact most - can’t just schedule a rally and have tens of thousands of people show up and prompt free media coverage. A full paid media campaign is still very necessary for most candidates to become known.
And why not ? You mean to tell me there are no billionaire conservo-libertarians? The notion is ludicrous.
><><
Name some.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.