Tuesday, April 05, 2016

Have Democratic Voters Had Enough Of Corrupt Insiders From The Party's DC Establishment Rigging Primaries?


Today the House Ethics Committee tabled the spurious ethics charges Chuck Schumer cooked up against Alan Grayson to drive him out of Congress and make room for Wall Street's errand boy, pitiful Schumercrat Patrick Murphy. In fact, instead of investigating Grayson, the Ethics Committee has decided to investigate Murphy for directing one of his sleazy staffers to leak confidential information to the media during the Office of Congressional Ethics investigation.

The corrupt Beltway Democratic Party Establishment feels itself under attack and is reacting ruthlessly to protect its power and the source of its spoils. Schumer has been orchestrating attacks against progressive icon Alan Grayson and against former Admiral Joe Sestak to insure the nomination of weak candidates without a point of view who will be willing puppets for himself and his Wall Street allies, respectively, Murphy and Katie McGinty, although neither of these unqualified candidates would be likely to survive a general election.

New polling from Harper came out this morning, showing Sestak continuing to increase his lead over McGinty. Even after the Obama and virtually the entire Democratic establishment endorsed their puppet, Sestak is leading 41% to 31% with Fetterman at 9%. This chart shows how likely Democratic primary voters responded when asked who they will vote for in 3 weeks. Sestak has stronger intensity of support (62% of his voters definitely voting for him, 31% probably) than McGinty (52%/42%).

After Sestak refused to pledge allegiance to Schumer personally-- Joe's old fashioned that way-- Schumer decided he'd rather see Toomey re-elected than allow an independent-minded Sestak get into the Senate. This is from his campaign a few days ago:
In 2010, Washington D.C.’s Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) did something it had never done before: it gave a candidate in a contested primary the $1.4 million it had always reserved for the general election. Nevertheless, Sen. Arlen Specter lost to Joe Sestak.

The day after the primary, Pat Toomey began spending millions of dollars on TV ads against Joe that went unanswered-- unanswered, because the DSCC financing meant to be available for a Democrat in the general election was spent propping up Specter in the primary. Undefended on TV, Joe dropped 18 points in the polls before he raised replacement funds for his own TV ads months later. Dogged, Joe only lost by 2%, but Pat Toomey became PA’s Senator.

On Friday, DSCC took the same dangerous action for the 2nd time in its history-- again, in PA. With Joe now ahead by 17% against a primary opponent who has no more of her own money to spend, DSCC placed $450K into this week’s TV buy against Joe-- the beginning of the full $1.9 million DSCC can do in 2016-- in order to dictate who Pennsylvanians should pick.

Worse, spending the $1.9 million in the primary means it once again won’t be available for the general election-- and this time Pat Toomey has $10 million in ready campaign cash for unanswered TV ads the day after the primary. The DSCC is handing Pat Toomey his election-- once again.

Dem Party leaders in Washington are taking money that should be used to beat Pat Toomey and instead using it to prop up a candidate trailing by 17% in the polls just because the top Dem Senate leaders will not accept Admiral Joe Sestak’s independent thought and people-first approach.
Also in Pennsylvania the progressive candidate who was running against Republican incumbent Ryan Costello in the 6th district, Lindy Li, was forced out of the Democratic primary last week. The DCCC candidate, Mike Parrish, a Republican-turned-quasi-Democrat, was recruited by Steve Israel who showed Parrish how to challenge Li's petitions. After Parrish's challenge, a court invalidated her signatures because the notary public stamped the petitions but neglected to sign them and then conveniently "disappeared" during the court case. Much of the $600,000 Li had raised for the primary was eaten up by the court case, which is exactly what the DCCC teaches their REpublican-lite candidates to do to progressive "interlopers."

Steve Israel may be very happy that his conservative candidate will now be the nominee but the chances of Parrish uniting the Democratic parties in parts of Chester, Berks and Montgomery counties that make up the 6th district is exactly zero. Winner by default: Ryan Costello in a district won against McCain 53-46%.

The establishment pulled their ultimate rabbit out of their hat in Florida, where they got Obama to endorse payday lender fanatics Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Patrick Murphy. Grayson reported a huge upsurge in online contributions from his progressive followers right after Obama endorsed "ex"-Republican Murphy and in yesterday's Huff Po, Amanda Terkel reported the same phenomena for Tim Canova, the progressive law professor challenging Wasserman Schultz, in post entitled Obama’s Endorsement Of Debbie Wasserman Schultz Brings In Serious Money... For Her Challenger.
Canova raised $557,000, powered by small donations. Nearly 15,300 people donated, for an average contribution of $20. Only six donors gave the maximum amount allowed under law, meaning he still has a significant pool of people to tap into for future donations.

...In the four days following Obama’s endorsement, Canova received nearly $100,000, according to his campaign-- almost a quarter of what he raised in the three-month period, even though they never actually fundraised off the endorsement.

Canova said he read Obama’s statement as “pretty boilerplate” and thought it showed that Wasserman Schultz was worried about losing her race.

“It’s what you would expect from a favor being called in. Let’s see if he does much more in the way of campaigning for her,” Canova said, adding that he has been trying to point out to voters key areas where the DNC chair has disagreed with Obama-- such as in her pushback on policies being put forward by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

“We’ve gotten her attention. She wouldn’t have been running to the White House to get that sort of statement if she wasn’t worried,” he said... Canova said he had also seen other spikes in donations to his campaign after three other developments: after news broke about Wasserman Schultz’s payday lending legislation, when the DNC reversed the ban on federal lobbyist donations and when the Florida Democratic Party said it would deny Canova access to its voter database (it later reversed that decision).

Let's continue to fight back against the corruption and the establishment dominance of what was formerly "the people's party." We don't need two Republican parties. One is bad enough. You can contribute to Grayson and Canova by tapping on the thermometer below. And if you're feeling flush, remember that Alex Law in South Jersey and Dave McTeague in western Oregon are also fight the good fight to rid the country of corrupt conservative incumbents, respectively, the Norcross Machine's Donald Norcross and chief Blue Dog Kurt Schrader. Congress would be a far better place without Wasserman Schultz, Patrick Murphy, Donald Norcross and Kurt Schrader.
Goal Thermometer

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


At 11:40 PM, Blogger lukeness said...

I'm highly amused. A couple of weeks ago, we were told that Sanders had no chance, because he'd have to win 58% of the remaining delegates to have more pledged delegates than Clinton. Since then, including the loss in Arizona, he's won about 63% of the delegates in 7 contests. For some reason we never hear how many Sanders needs to take the lead in pledged delegates anymore. Wonder why.

The Clinton lead is not a lot more than 200 now if all the pledged delegates from Washington and Wisconsin are included. (Mysteriously, the NY Times, as an example, continues to show Sanders winning the Washington delegates 25-9, leaving out the other 67 delegates that Sanders likely won 49 or 50 of.) At this rate he takes the lead on April 26.

At 6:18 AM, Anonymous ap215 said...

One simple word Yes.

At 4:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Have Democratic Voters Had Enough Of Corrupt Insiders From The Party's DC Establishment Rigging Primaries?"

Look at those who aren't Feeling the Bern and who are still voting for Hillary. The correct answer is: Not Enough Democratic Voters Have Had Enough Of Corrupt Insiders From The Party's DC Establishment Rigging Primaries. Too many still think It's Her Turn no matter what new revelations emerge from scandalous fund raising to the Panama Papers.

Considering the incredible BS voters across the spectrum spout when asked about why they support their candidates, this election might as well be held in Stockholm.


Post a Comment

<< Home