Why I'm likely to piss you off in the next six months...

[brooklynite]

Last edited Sun May 31, 2020, 05:22 PM - Edit history (1)

June is the period when most Primaries are resolved (this Tuesday we'll know our Senate candidates in Georgia and Iowa) and we'll begin to focus more on the General Election. Folks here will advocate for candidates they think deserve support. And I will probably shoot some of them down.

Let's be clear: I would never advocate NOT voting for a Democratic nominee, or not volunteering for their campaigns. But the endorsements invariably come with a request to provide financial support. And that's where I have to draw the line.

I probably receive more requests for money from candidates than anyone else here, and I have multiples calls directly from the candidates each week. In order to have an informed conversation, I started to assemble data on the competitive races around the country, which has evolved into a programmable model that tracks the competitiveness of the district/State and the candidate, the impact of key endorsements, up and down-ticket synergies, and financial status. Broadly speaking, I don't want to give money to candidates who don't need my help, or candidates for whom my help won't make a difference.

Because I (like you) have a finite supply of money to spend on campaigns, I've learned a valuable lesson over the years: don't let emotion drive your decisions. I don't want a candidate to tell me: "I'm running against [insert name of Republican I don't like]". I want them to tell me that they can BEAT [insert name of candidate I don't like], and the explain why.

In the context of 2020, we have to 1) win the Presidency, 2) hold the House and 3) win the Senate. That calls for a lot of financial investment, and therefore some rational thought about candidate choices is necessary. The $50 you give to a hopeless but emotionally appealing candidate in a longshot race is $50 you can't give to a candidate who's more competitive.

Case in point: Kentucky Senate. I've seen a lot of posts about beating Mitch McConnell and encouraging support for Amy McGrath (whom I've met with). I, like you, would love to get rid of Mitch McConnell; but the way to do that isn't to beat McConnell, it's to give the Senate to the Democrats. To do THAT, we need to pick up 3-4 more seats. And the seats that are most likely to flip are AZ-CO-ME-NC. After that are potential reaches in GA (both seats)-KS-IA-MT. KY is WAY down on the list. McConnell has a huge war chest and despite his low approval rates, has been re-elected five times. Cold-hearted analysis would say that this isn't a race to support IF there's a race with a higher probability of victory.

Some of you will say that this attitude is unfair; that we should "compete for every seat"; that McGrath can't show if she can win without support. And you're right. But my response is: "too bad". If you can't support everyone, you have to make choices. And those choices should be made rationally. Some Democratic candidates have shown they can compete against Republican incumbents, and some have not. Nobody is suggesting that we go all in on defeating Mike Rounds in SD or even the open seat in Wyoming. The targeting of McConnell is because of how people feel about him, rather than his vulnerability.

So, going forward, be aware that I'll be opining on which races I think we can win, and which I think we can't. My goal is to maximize the return of my (and your) contributions to maximize the wins we need to achieve. Nothing personal.

[rzemanfl]

1. Send me all your money. I will take the calls. Problem solved. n/t

[SharonClark]

25. Made me laugh.

[rzemanfl]

43. Thank you.

I was kinda hoping for big check though....

[calguy]

2. Well said

[Karadeniz]

3. Time for campaign finance reform again.

[brooklynite]

18. No objection from me...

...but neither will I unilaterally disengage.

[Blue_true]

32. An how do we get that without a solid democratic Congress and a democrat in the White House.

Everyone on our side need to focus on what comes first, instead of chasing an idea that has no chance without us gaining solid control in Washington and in key state capitols.

[Karadeniz]

38. Well, yes...!

[former9thward]

40. Why do you think a "solid Democratic Congress" would pass campaign reform?

No Democratic presidential candidates, successful or unsuccessful, have campaigned for that since the mid 1970s. That was the last time anything significant passed on that topic. What candidate is campaigning on that in 2020?

[Blue_true]

41. Change happens, even when politicians don't campaign on it.

In fact, it is smart not to campaign on it, because republicans will demogogue it during the race.

[pbmus]

4. Have already donated to each of your most likely....however

I am also giving to Amy....

[MyOwnPeace]

5. I, for one, thank you...........

I appreciate your "cold stare" into the realities facing us come November. As much as I REALLY, REALLY want to see Moscow Mitch McTurtle get gone, your sharing the reality of that possibility as well as a better way to be sure he is just another turd sitting on the lawn (which he really is anyhow, but right now he has too much power) makes so much sense to someone who has to decide where to add support for candidates.
I'll be honest - I'm not one of the COKE - Koke - Cock- Koch (which ever one is right ) Brothers, so I have to really think about where to send my monies. Your thoughts on that are beneficial.
Thanks - I ain't gonna' be pizzed at 'ya!
Let's just all go out there and WIN IT ALL!!!!!

[Celerity]

29. 'I'm not one of the COKE - Koke - Cock- Koch (which ever one is right ) Brothers'

Moscow is


'Cocaine Mitch' shirts a hot seller for McConnell campaign

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/cocaine-mitch-shirts-hot-seller-mcconnell-campaign-n1003686

[boston bean]

6. Such decisions. What to do with all that money.

Makes my problems seem so small.

[leftieNanner]

7. I agree with your analysis

We need a net four seats in the Senate. As much as I would like Moscow Mitch ground into the dirt, it might actually be more interesting to see him trying to navigate within the Senate that he has crafted with his toxic methods. No more judicial filibusters for any court seat. RBG will be replaced by a flaming liberal - just like her! And potentially no more legislative filibusters either. All those 400 bills currently sitting in his in box? They just might see the light of day in the next congress (after the House re-passes them).

I will be making my contributions judiciously as well.

[redstateblues]

8. Great post. I've been donating to McGrath but your strategy makes sense.

Which of the four you mention is the most needy as far as money goes?

[brooklynite]

16. Of the four, Cal Cunningham in NC...

...second choice would be Gideon in Maine.

Mark Kelly is actually off my list (I gave to him early on) because he's amassed the largest financial reserve of anyone (INCLUDING McConnell).

[oasis]

9. Unless new developments crop up, yours seems to be the best way.

[Meadowoak]

10. Amy McGrath will beat Mitch McTurtle in November, she has a good ground game here in KY. And the

Turtle man is truly hated here.

[CTyankee]

20. Even tho he is hated, my fear is that the pukes will do anything to keep him...

are you expecting big time voter suppression there and if so, how are you planning to foil such attempts?

[Meadowoak]

46. We have a Democratic Governor now, I don't expect any voter suppression.

But we'll see what happens with the primary on June 23.

[Atticus]

11. By all means, express your opinion on as many candidates as you care to. Most of us will

consider your thoughts and compare and contrast them with those of others who post here.

While I agree that there is a place for "cold calculation" in the allocation of finite resources, there is also something to be said for the power of passionate enthusiasm and, yes, "rooting for the underdog". As Democrats, most of us identify with the underdog and love to see them buck the odds. It was part of President Obama's "magic" that he overcame so many conventional disadvantages to win it all.

So, let's not write anyone off. The Fat Lady hasn't even cleared her throat yet.

[MyOwnPeace]

35. Oh, don't say that!

"The Fat Lady hasn't even cleared her throat yet."

You know IQ45 will talk about her in some crazy tweet of his tonight!

[Squinch]

12. Kay.

[alwaysinasnit]

13. Hard truth but very practical.

[Drahthaardogs]

14. THIS is EXACTLY the way we operate

And get our asses kicked. 50. State. Strategy! Period!

[Atticus]

24. Thank you. nt

[Celerity]

15. I've six flips atm, your 4 plus IA and MT, we will lose AL, so that all yields a 52-48 Dem majority

I would have listed 8 flips, but Tim McGraw refusing to run yet again in TN, and Sibelius refusing to run in KS really hurts our chances in those two. TN is toast, but Bollier might have a shot in KS. Both open seats too! Shameful those two refused to run in such a vital year. GRRRRRR

Both the two GA seats are going to be tough, but we might get lucky in the regular race (Perdue is weak.) Abrams and Yates refusing to run hurts as well..

KY is massive reach. Fuck I wish Moscow Mitch would go down, but it will be extraordinarily hard.

TX and AK even more so. As in less than 5% chances for both. Begich refusing to run in AK has meant we do not even have a Dem on the ballot. There is a long shot indy, Al Gross, but he is a major longshot.

[brooklynite]

17. I'd say Kansas is a good second tier prospect IF Kobach gets the Republican nomination...

[Celerity]

19. you never said anything on IA in terms of flipping or not, unless I missed it. What's you rating?

[brooklynite]

22. Oversight; IA is in my second tier group.

[Celerity]

31. +100000

[Celerity]

21. Sibelius would have won no matter who the Rethugs put up I think. Mackler is polling

poorly in TN. I am so unhappy with Tim McGraw. He said for ages he would run for TN when he was 50 He is 53 now, and now has twice refused to run for OPEN SEATS.

[brooklynite]

23. I mat with Mackler earlier this year and gave him the same blunt message....

I'll need to see some positive movement before I'll put money into that race.

[Celerity]

27. If you ever talk to Tim McGraw, tell him he fucked up BAD in 2018 and 2020. Ask him why

he said for so long he would run when he was 50, and now has refused TWICE, in such a damn dire time. SMDH

[Pacifist Patriot]

26. I learned a long time ago that strategic thinkers piss people off.

And I'm okay with that.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

28. I greatly appreciate your post, my dear brooklynite.

I am mostly following your lead, except for Amy McGrath. She's hot on his heels and I think she has a better than even chance.

However, I could be wrong!

I look forward to reading your further analysis as we get closer to the election.

[Celerity]

33. if you have the quid, you might send a wee bit to Bullock in MT and the winner of the IA primary too

I think both, especially MT, go Blue.

Daines and Ernst are true Rump-lickers

hugz my dear Peggy

[CaliforniaPeggy]

34. Oh, I already am supporting Bullock! He is GREAT.

Hugz back atcha, dear Celerity!

[Celerity]

37. Theresa Greenfield is probbably going to win the IA Dem primary, so that's were I am hoping to

send my bit of cash. I like Michael Franken too, I think he could win v ernst. Mauro has went negative campaigning, so he is a meh for me.

[SharonClark]

30. I've served on several PACs and that is exactly how decisions are made on where to

send contributions. It's the fiscally responsible thing to do when you're spending other people's money.

However, people also give money to encourage a candidate to run for office, to make sure a really bad person has an opponent, and to get their issues on the table.

I do a little of both.

[Demsrule86]

36. I call it realistic.

[MoonlitKnight]

39. I would add State Legislative races as a top priority

Considering is a census year. Holding the House just to lose it to redistricting is not advisable.

[Act_of_Reparation]

42. A serious question:

When I was studying political science a million years ago, conventional wisdom was the candidate who raises the most cash usually wins. Is that still the case? If so, I totally agree with you. If not, a more rigorous evaluation is required. You'd have to donate your money to the candidates in districts where more money can actually make a difference.

[grantcart]

45. Jeb Bush killed that theory in 2016 when he showed up w $ 100 million

For a primary campaign and got nothing.

Lots of other examples which is not to say it isn't important, it is, just not the singular one it used to be.

[Happy Hoosier]

44. Humblebrag.

Spend your money where you think it will do the most good. Ask the candidates to directly call some of us plebs too, just to give us the impression we matter!

Cheers!