Posted by: skepticalbrotha | April 1, 2007

Resistance is futile: Borg Queen raises $ 26 million

The malevolence that is Hillary Clinton has announced her first quarter fund-raising total-a record shattering $ 36 million, that is approximate to George W. Bush’s earth shattering total in the summer of 1999 when her $10 million in Senate re-elect money is factored in.  This number is calculated to send the unmistakable signal that resistance is futile.  Apparently intimidated by Barack Obama’s record setting jaunts across America in which he was received like a messiah, she released the cybernetic DLC fund-raising drone that masquerades as her husband in an attempt to keep pace.  

The Obama camp has remained strangely silent and hasn’t confirmed their totals.  Edwards numbers are strong and in the double digits also.   He will have what is necessary to be heard, but in the end, he will fall short regardless of what the Iowa polling numbers are showing us now.   Neither Governor Richrdson, Senator Dodd, or Senator Biden,will have what it takes to go to the mat on this one.   The top three democratic contenders have been like vacuum cleaners and effectively removed all of the available money in the field. Whether we like it or not, the Queen has won round one.  If she hadn’t, we woulda heard about it by now.

Posted in 2008, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Bill Richarson, Christopher Dodd, DLC, Hillary, John Edwards, Obama vs. Hillary, Politics, Power Games, Safe Negro Report, fundraising

« Shaquanda Cotton Released!!!!!!
Obama’s methodical fundraising »

Responses

SB:

Maybe Obama’s camp is quiet because he’s going to have to defend handing an out to GeeDubya on funding the Iraq war:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/1/135422/4038

Pay attention to this tidbit:

“If President Bush vetoes an Iraq war spending bill as promised, Congress quickly will provide the money without the withdrawal timeline the White House objects to because no lawmaker “wants to play chicken with our troops,” Sen. Barack Obama said Sunday. “

By: The Political Junkie on April 1, 2007
at 9:15 pm

The Queen, ultimately and presently, has not won. Although I know she wishes she had. The Obama team has not been strangely silent; they’ve been smartly silent while her team of rah-rah girls say how ‘wunnerful’ Hillary has broken records and so forth. Note on the conference call where she announced this, her people refused to say how much is primary money and how much general. They got their story out quickly and sketchily, so they could amend it “closer to the 15th.”

The story was that Obama has raised near $35 million, according to Jerome Armstrong at myDD. If so, $10 million of that is probably general money and $25 million primary. That ould put the Borg Queen in a bind as her inevitability would then be shot to hell.

By: Anonymous on April 1, 2007
at 9:21 pm

political junkie,

Like Rangel said, He ain’t ready and he ain’t as down as some would like to believe on the war. Now that his fundraising operation has gotten him to the point where Hillary can feel his wingtip in her damn back, I guess he wants to convey a sense of mainstream steadiness to the white folk and further press his advantage. What he’s done is get progressives to question his bonifides, which ain’t cool.

By: skepticalbrotha on April 1, 2007
at 9:21 pm

Anonymous,

If you’re right, this shit is bout to get interesting. :)

By: skepticalbrotha on April 1, 2007
at 9:23 pm

Hillary and the DLC

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2007/4/1/185920/4542

By: rikyrah on April 1, 2007
at 9:29 pm

Resistance May Be Futile, but I’m STILL not voting for her.

Period.

By: rikyrah on April 1, 2007
at 9:29 pm

SB,

Nothing on that new poll talking about how many will NOT vote for The Borg Queen?

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=744

By: rikyrah on April 1, 2007
at 9:32 pm

I’m not voting for her either, but if Obama wins, I don’t know if I feel like holding my nose and voting for him, either.

Especially since he decided to undermine Pelosi’s and Reid’s strategy on getting Bush to cave. See my post above and click on the DKos link to see what I mean.

By: The Political Junkie on April 1, 2007
at 10:20 pm

I was watching Rangel on Meet the Press. Didn’t he say the same thing? That Shrub would get his money for the troops?

By: rikyrah on April 1, 2007
at 10:22 pm

Another story with the Obama/CNN transcript:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/1/152416/1097?detail=f

By: rikyrah on April 1, 2007
at 11:07 pm

>>Resistance May Be Futile, but I’m STILL not voting for her.

Period.

By: vev on April 2, 2007
at 9:03 am

I’m with rikyrah.

By: vev on April 2, 2007
at 9:05 am

I read the link in rikyrah’s post #5 - “Hillary and the DLC”. It’s an older article, and I’ve read it before.

Key point in the main blockquote:

Simon Rosenberg, the former field director for the DLC who directs the New Democrat Network, a spin-off political action committee, says, “We’re trying to raise money to help them lessen their reliance on traditional interest groups in the Democratic Party. In that way,” he adds, “they are ideologically freed, frankly, from taking positions that make it difficult for Democrats to win.”

Article says “spin-off,” I’d say “competition.” There are two outfits, the DLC & the NDN. The NDN gets its contribs from the same shady sources (like Koch Industries) & ideologically is similar to the DLC. The only issue is the grab for power, that is Clintonistas vs New-New Dems. The New-New Dems financial power base is technocrats from SanFran. Treasurer of NDNPAC is Adam Smith. He is now on board with Obama.

I’ve said it before — there isn’t a lick of policy difference between the two of them — it’s just a matter of which side of the new Dem civil war you’re on. We’re just on the sidelines of the old guard vs new guard power struggle, which is why I’ve always thought that a power-sharing arrangement may get brokered in the end.

By: dblhelix on April 2, 2007
at 10:30 am

The Political Junkie,

George Bush has proven himself to be an irrational downright crazy religious nut on some sort of Christian crusade through the middle east. Do you think he’s going to ponder one moment of reservation about keeping those kids over there without proper body armor and equipment? Funding or no funding, he’s not pulling them out! In fact, it would serve his purpose to blame Democrats for an increase in body count due to the lack of proper body armour and equipment. You name me one Democratic contender for the White House or Congressman/Senator up for relelection in ‘08 that is so fervent and principled against this War that they would risk having to answer to a parent of a wounded or killed soldier who died–after funds were cut off? Not one! I’m as against this war as you or anyone, but I’m with Obama in that these kids should not be the prize in a game of chicken with this mad man!

By: DTD on April 2, 2007
at 11:47 am

DTD:

We can agree to disagree about the funding for the war, but Obama knows better than to do George Bush’s talking for him, and that’s the point I was making.

The way Pelosi and Reid set it up, Bush was going to be the one playing chicken - like Newt Gingrich got blamed for shutting down the government back in 1996, due to overreaching, Bush is in the same position.

That is, until Obama opened his yap, and gave Bush an out, while undermining his own party.

If 70% of this country wants our kids home, and that this war has been a miserable failure, why would Obama start talking like a damned warhawk?

If the context of what he said is wrong, then he needs to clean it up. Otherwise it looks like he’s being DLC about the whole thing, and that’s no better than an out and out ReThug.

Seems like Obama’s listening too much to his advisors, and not trusting his own instincts to say and do the right thing.

And Bush sent those kids over there without proper equipment from Day One, and he had full funding and authorization from Congress. So, what’s the difference, except his request for money is not being automatically rubber-stamped?

By: The Political Junkie on April 2, 2007
at 12:11 pm

BTW, I apologize for the redundancy in my earlier post, “killed soldier who died.” And I should have added the quote from Rangel that Rikyrah referenced…

from Sunday’s Meet the Press:

Tim Russert asked Rangel: “what happens if the president says, ‘I’m vetoing this bill because it has a date fixed for withdrawal’? … You won’t give them the money for the troops?”

Mr. Rangel replied: “Oh, no…Ultimately, politically, we have to give him money.”

Rangel, Obama, and 99% of the Democrats know that in the end they can ill afford to affirm fears of the public that they are unsupportive of our troops and willing to put them in harms way just to score political points against George Bush.

By: DTD on April 2, 2007
at 12:22 pm

Political Junkie,

Hmmm, I don’t think giving government workers a few days off and DC metro riders, like myself, extra seats on the subway compare to the prospect of loss of life. Obama wasn’t giving George Bush an out; the Republican talking points memo has been on blast fax and email since last week: “Demorats–yet again–show that they don’t support our troops.” Obama, Rangel and others were simply playing defense. Moreover, I don’t think it’s fair to call Obama “hawkish.” If he had his way, we wouldn’t be in this War, but we are where we are, and his first priority has to be to protect the troops. You’re correct in your observation that 70% of the country wants to end this war, but an equal number or more are firmly against cutting off funds. That’s the number George Bush is looking at. Couple that with the lingering concerns that Americans have about the Democratic Party’s strength on defense, cutting off funds is just not an option, and I guess neither Obama nor Rangel was in the mood for pretense yesterday.

By: DTD on April 2, 2007
at 12:40 pm

Obama’s comment, indeed undercutting the Democrats strategy was UNCALLED for. Remember, as Al Sharp pointed out. He did support Lieberman when he was running for re-election. I saw the footage - he was booed. BOOED.

By: vev on April 2, 2007
at 1:17 pm

Off Topic, but…
ROMNEY raised 23 Million this quarter?

How?
Why?
What does he have that would pry over 20 Million bucks from folks?

By: rikyrah on April 2, 2007
at 2:06 pm

Latest Rasmussen Poll:

The Borg Queen 33%
Obama 26%
Edwards 17%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political%20Tracking/Democratic%20Primaries/DemocraticPresidentialPrimary.htm

By: rikyrah on April 2, 2007
at 2:08 pm

What does he have that would pry over 20 Million bucks from folks?

A good chunk of it is from Utah, deep-pocket Mormon support.
2.5 mill is a loan from himself.
He made his money as a VC — probably is well-connected.
Gives his student fundraisers a 10% cut as incentive.

By: dblhelix on April 2, 2007
at 3:16 pm

I don’t know, DTD:

Since I was one of those government workers who got sent home and had to deal with bill collectors because Newt decided to pitch a fit.

It could go either way; the troops were already going without, and Bush had the money to give them what they needed for combat. Remember Rummy’s “You go to war with the Army you got” comment? Well, most of those kids in Iraq think about his comments every friggin day, and probably wishing anyone so gun-ho on this war should enlist and join them in the foxholes or on the road to Bagdhad, hoping you’ll get there and back in one piece.

We’ve been over there six years and counting. Bush needs to put a time line on troop withdrawal. Whether he does it by 2008, or whether he does it the day he leaves office in 2009, you would think the one time this fool would want to look reasonable…

Wait, I forgot. He already thinks he’s reasonable with his “you’re either for me or against me” way of thinking.

He had his exit plan from ‘Nam - he didn’t take his ass over there.

By: The Political Junkie on April 2, 2007
at 4:10 pm

Political Junkie,

I wanted to believe the military and their families would have been outrage by Rummy’s comments, the deception that started the war and the resulting mismanagement, but to my shock, the were one of Bush’s strongest and most reliable voting blocks that gave him the first clear majority win in a presidential election since Reagan. Go figure! Again, I hate this war as much as anyone on this blog on on the left, but I think this guy has the Dems in a catch-22 on defense and national security. Even worse than dealing with an idiot in the WH is dealing with pretty stupid electorate and non-voting majority.

Vev,

As with his position on Irag funding, Obama was being practical in the CT race–as were most Democrats, including every contender running for the Democratic nomination with the exception of Kucinich. I haven’t heard playa hatin’ Sharpton mention that Hillary Clinton also campaigned for Lieberman. He has nothing but praise for her, but never mentions she gave Bush the keys to drive the tanks into Iraq. Why is Obama always singled out? Lamont didn’t have a chance in hell of winning in the general election. As an Independent, Lieberman has far more power than what he would have had as a Democrat. The problem with so-called “progressives” is that they don’t have any real measurement of progress. Winning tiny battles but continuously losing the war is not progressive, e.g. winning the primary; losing the general election; and giving a pissed-off Lieberman the balance of power in the Senate.

By: DTD on April 2, 2007
at 4:51 pm

Sorry for not doing better proof reading in my last post. :-)

By: DTD on April 2, 2007
at 4:55 pm

DTD, and that is another reason that Kucinich is my man. Obama can go BLOW.

By: vevspeaks on April 2, 2007
at 5:08 pm

Romney’s $21 million haul is a minor surprise, but not a big one. He’s worked with great success in the business sector for most of his life and he comes from a political family — his father was Governor of Michigan. And yeah, the Mormon thing probably helps him, too. This should keep him in the top-tier of candidates with McCain and Giuliani.

I think Obama’s camp will have figures similar to Romney’s.

By: Ogre Mage on April 3, 2007
at 1:17 am

Obama refuses Hillary sandwich

By: dblhelix on April 3, 2007
at 1:14 pm

BTW, that is a great pic of Hillary as the BQ.

By: Ogre Mage on April 4, 2007
at 1:03 am

[...] I always knew Hillary Clinton lost a lot of black support when she supported the war in Iraq. She is going to have a problem in [...]

By: African American Political Pundit»Blog Archive » Hillary Clinton and voters on April 5, 2007
at 1:57 pm

[...] I always knew Hillary Clinton lost a lot of black support when she supported the war in Iraq. She is going to have a problem in [...]

By: African American (Black) Opinion Blog » Hillary Clinton and black voters on April 5, 2007
at 2:00 pm

DTD,

Lieberman got kicked out of the Democratic Party and good g-d riddance to him. That’s what he gets for supporting Israel’s interests over those of the United States. Bernie Sanders has the balance of power, too but he wouldn’t caucus with the Republicans and neither is Lieberman, despite his blusterings.

By: Ernesto on April 6, 2007
at 2:24 am

Leave a response






Your response:

Categories