The 20 Clinton-backing fat cats who vaguely threatened House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to change her tune on superdelegates lest their purses and pocketbooks slam shut have contributed almost "$24 million to Democratic candidates and committees over the last 10 years," according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
They've donated almost $554,000 to Sen. Hillary Clinton's Senate and presidential campaigns and her leadership PAC -- compared to less than a tenth of that, $52,200, for Sen. Barack Obama.
"To borrow from an investment firm's old ad campaign," says the Center, "when big donors talk, politicians listen."
Except that there is just one problem with this kind of threat. It may have worked in the 2000 or 2004 campaign, but there is a new shift in political campaign donations with the rise of the small donor. Look at how Barack Obama has been able to generate millions of dollars in small donations of $100 or less with the use of online contributions and social networking sites. This can be a powerful counterweight to the big Democratic donors--especially when the fat cats are demanding a greater say in how the candidates are selected.
There is more. Further into the ABC News story:
UPDATE: ABC News' Political Director David Chalian reports that a Democratic operative unaffiliated with either campaign and familiar with the reaction to the letter among Members of Congress says, "Members of Congress - who are superdelegates - make up the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee" or DCCC from which the donors seemed to be threatening to withhold funds.
"Threatening the DCCC is equal to threatening the superdelegates Sen. Hillary Clinton's trying to court. The Clinton donor letter will just push undeclared superdelegates in Congress leaning toward Obama to endorse him sooner. It also reinforces the narrative that she'll destroy the party to win."
In other words, the fat cats' letter to threaten Pelosi is backfiring. Democratic members of Congress, who are also members of the DCCC, certainly don't like to be threatened by these big Clinton donors--vote our way, or we'll cut off your funding. These are the same super delegates that Hillary Clinton is trying to solicit their support. And now to have Clinton fat cats sending threatening letters? You can bet that will piss of these Democratic congressmen, and possibly send them over to the Obama camp.
But there is even more to this story. According to The Huffington Post:
Aides to Sen. Hillary Clinton said on Thursday that they knew key fundraisers for her campaign were sending a letter to Nancy Pelosi, castigating the Speaker over her position on superdelegates and threatening, vaguely, to withhold campaign donations.
And while they did not go so far as to say they approved of the letter's content -- "we didn't know what was in it," said spokesman Phil Singer -- they did argue that the "letter speaks for itself."
"There is clearly a broad feeling among many Democrats and many people who are active in the party," said Singer, "that the role of superdelegates is to exercise independent judgment and make a decision that is best for the party and best for the country."
The Clinton campaign knew that the fat cat Clinton donors had sent the letter to Speaker Pelosi. They knew about the letter. And while the Clinton campaign claims that they didn't know the contents of the letter, they could have easily surmised that the contents were not going to be friendly to Pelosi. The Clinton campaign did nothing to either talk to their big donors about the contents of the letter, review the letter for any fallout that could hurt the Clinton campaign, or even ask that the big donors not send the letter to Pelosi. They did nothing. And by doing nothing, the Clinton campaign pretty much approved of the contents in the fat cats' letter.
What is especially interesting about this story is this paragraph:
And while they did not go so far as to say they approved of the letter's content -- "we didn't know what was in it," said spokesman Phil Singer -- they did argue that the "letter speaks for itself."
The Clinton campaign argued that the "letter speaks for itself." This is especially damning for the Clinton campaign since the Clinton campaign is approving of the Clinton donors threat to Pelosi on withholding their political campaign contributions to the DCCC if Pelosi did not retract her comments regarding the super delegates. The Clinton campaign approved of the extortion threat made against Pelosi by the big Clinton donors. Are the Clinton staffers that stupid? You do not know what the contents of the letter are, but you still approve of the letter's contents that was sent to Pelosi. You approve of the extortion threat that the Clinton fat cats made against Pelosi. This is a total screw-up on part of the Clinton campaign.
And I think the Clinton campaign knew the screwed up this badly. Continuing into the Huffington Post story:
Asked whether the Clinton campaign thought it would be appropriate for party financiers to threaten to withhold funds should Pelosi not change her stance, aides to the New York Democrat restated their commitment to helping build a larger Democratic congressional majority.
"As someone who is a former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who spent a lot of years working in the House, who has both friends and family working in the House, I feel, as do most of the people I know, absolutely committed to helping elect Democrats to the House in 2008," said Clinton's communications director, Howard Wolfson. "I believe strongly in Nancy Pelosi's leadership. Obviously, some of our donors had an issue that they wanted to put into writing... But Senator Clinton and Bill Clinton will not take a backseat to anyone when it comes to helping Democrats or helping to fund the party committees. And the people here at every level are absolutely committed to large democratic majorities in 2008 and doing everything we can to helping achieve those large majorities."
Wolfson evaded the question. He claims that Senator Clinton is committed to electing Democrats in the House. But in the next sentence, Wolfson claims that Clinton "will not take a backseat to anyone when it comes to helping Democrats or helping to fund the party committees." This is a strange sentence. It is almost like saying that the Clinton campaign does not approve of the extortion threat made by the big donors, after the letter was made public. But yet, the Clinton campaign believes that the "letter speaks for itself," even though they didn't know the contents of the letter. It is political damage spin-control here, and it is done very badly. The Clinton campaign knows they can't answer the question of approving or disapproving the extortion threat their big donors made against Pelosi. So we get this non-answer on the extortion threat, but an approval of Clinton fat cat donors sending the letter.
What a mess.
No comments:
Post a Comment