Howard Dean Bringing In Big Money From Major Donors Once Skeptical Of Him
This is interesting: Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean, who was greeted with intense skepticism by the party's big-money donors at the outset of his tenure, appears on track to bring in far more cash this quarter from those top fundraisers than many expected.
The DNC is on track to haul in roughly $14 million this quarter, approximately $3.8 million of which comes from major donors, who are defined as donors who gave more than $5,000 as an individual or from a PAC, the DNC says. That's a significant jump from the first quarter of 2003 -- the last comparable year -- when the DNC raised only $2.23 million from major donors, according to the DNC's numbers.
Yes, Dean is being helped by the White House's awful political travails. Nonetheless, it's still significant, because it suggests that Dean has had far more success than many expected in winning over the party's major contributors, who were initially so skeptical of Dean's gloves-off, grass-roots approach that they privately were threatening to clamp shut their wallets.
Top Democratic donor Robert Zimmerman describes the jump in money from the big contributors as "very significant."
"The major donors initially were skeptical of Dean and his 50-state strategy," Zimmerman says. "Dean had to prove the merits and logic of his strategies. But the success of his 50-state strategy certainly has impressed the establishment donor community. Unlike in 2004, when there was an overreliance on 527s that undermined the idea of a strong party structure, the support Dean is receiving from major donors shows a growing recognition among them that a strong DNC is an essential tool for victory in 2008."
Times do change.
Robert Zimmerman? Is this the same tool who always seems to be on CNN's "The Situation Room"?
March 30, 2007 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Times are changing, but nowhere near as much as they should be. In fact, it could easily be argued nothing is changing. Until we have public financing of all elections, this travesty of 'fund raising' will continue.
March 30, 2007 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not that I am a major donor, but I decided after 2004 that I wasn't going to give the Democrats any more of my hard earned money until they demonstrated to me that they knew how to win. Maybe that's part of the explanation regarding the big donors, too.
_________________________________________________________
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
March 30, 2007 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sending the DNC another check. This money thing sucks, I know, but if dollars equal speech (man I hate that argument), then I say grassroots, meet them in their own backyard strategies as opposed to giving money to the Dem consultants running big national campaigns. They suck at it.
March 30, 2007 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Er... who are the "establishment donor community"? I just hope that Dean hasn't sold out. Cautiously optimistic that Zimmerman (a Hillary supporter) gave us the real reason for 'the' suddan turnaround in "major donor" support.
March 30, 2007 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Robert Zimerman raised over $1M for John Kerry in the last GE.
March 30, 2007 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dean's just doing his job. It has nothing to do with "selling out."
March 30, 2007 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too many people fail to understand that the real Howard Dean is the sober governor of the early to mid nineties, not the ranting caricature that the media and the right wing have tried to convince people that he is. It's no surprise that he has the Democratic Party on a glide path to permanent majority status, although Bush's cluelessness has definitely aided the process.
March 30, 2007 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
"glide path to permanent majority status"...I like that. It has a ring to it.
March 30, 2007 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is the 50 state strategy? Is that what has us on the glide path to permanent majority status?
March 31, 2007 5:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I see a Robert Zimmerman on Lou Dobbs: I usually watch this from 6.45 to 7 for the "best political panel in the world!". Over five years, especially when he was governor Dean took part in a weekly discussion forum (sometimes with Emmett and other right wing types)in Canada. He was impressive, had a mastery of issues and could be sharp in his responses to his American rightwing opposites. The Canadian were much more circumspect and left Dean to throw the punch. This man has a better grasp of issues than the media let on. But shallowness is de rigeur in Washington.
March 31, 2007 6:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have long been a supporter of Gov. Dean and I'm very happy to see that his 50 state strategy has been recognized and validated. We even see evidence of his footprint here in the red state of Alabama. Now we just have to get rid of the odious, and embarrassing, Jeff Sessions, but we're working on that!
March 31, 2007 7:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Robert Zimmerman ... doesn't he also have a musical career?
March 31, 2007 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny how his record in Vermont was never raised by his opponents. His campaign competitors in '04, the DNC/DLC establishment and the Right Wing Noise Machine all glommed on to, and propagated, the notion of latte-sipping Volvo driving peaceniks. Nothing could be farther from the reality of what Dr.Dean did during his years in Montpelier. Just ask the working class folks who live in the state. Heck, one of my former produce delivery drivers was on a first name basis with the guy. Because I knew the real Dean, I understood exactly what he meant when he started talking about guys with gun racks and rebel flags, but only because they already made up a significant chunk of his VT consitituency. He connected with them in ways that neither Bush nor Kerry could. I still think he would have made a great President.
March 31, 2007 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll take the ? at face value. It meant that from
his election as DNC Chair in 2005 until November
of 2006 Dean invested $ in ensuring there was at least a minimal democratic office in every state no matter how red . Which led to bitter disputes with Rahm Emanuel (sp ?) who wanted to redirect those funds to marginal congressional seats.
March 31, 2007 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I bet it is! Every time I see that guy I wonder who the hell he is and why he's so terrible. CNN calls him a "Democratic strategist," but it makes sense that he's actually a donor. A real strategist would be somewhat less terrible, one would think.
March 31, 2007 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
While this is certainly true, I'm not sure it explains all of the establishment's hostility towards Dean. Was it Dean's politics that made him dangerous...or his outsider status? Dean attacked the Democratic establishment and it fought back - but Dean won in '06, and to the victor goes the spoils.
If Democrats have learned anything in the last six years, it's that you can't get anything done without majorities. The Rovian strategy of freezing out Democrats and avoiding Congressional compromise at all costs taught everyone - even the folks at the DLC - some important lessons about party loyalty. Namely, that you get nothing if you are in the minority.
March 31, 2007 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're thinking of Bob Zimmerman.
March 31, 2007 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the answer to that question would be analogous to the old story about the blind men looking at the elephant. In other words, either explanation is accurate depending on one's perspective.
Dean's anti-war stance was too easily dismissed as a result of the the Zeitgeist that predominated after 9/11. Remember when he was ridiculed for saying that the removal of Sadddam made us less safe?
Alternatively, the Dean/Trippe internet fund raising model did threaten the existing order, at least until they were able to co-opt it for their own purposes.
Evidence to support the point made in your second paragraph can be seen in the way Pelosi was able to bring the House Dems together to gain majority support for the bill on the Iraq war.
March 31, 2007 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting insights. Thanks.
March 31, 2007 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have no idea how red-staters like those of us in Texas appreciated Howard Dean's determination to spread the Democratic party's influence into all 50 states.
When Kerry was running, I couldn't even FIND a state party headquarters office. I kept sending e-mails to his campaign headquarters, offering to do SOMETHING, ANYTHING, but those were the days when candidates didn't even bother to VISIT the states where they didn't think they stood a chance. I seldom even saw a campaign ad. Once, I drove 100 miles to find the Democratic party office of a town of about 100,000 and couldn't even find it. This is intensely demoralizing and frustrating to the party faithful.
So Dean comes in and says he's going to spread out in all 50 states and I was so excited I started sending money every month to the party. And man, in 2006, did it pay off! I KNEW that strategy would work because I'd been in the middle of one that didn't.
So power to him. And all the "big doners" who thought Dean had to prove his wild and crazy theory to reach out to ALL of us in the party--well, they can just take a flying leap.
March 31, 2007 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ghost of Tom Joad and owenz are thinking like typical loser-appeasement Democrats!
I've seen Zimmerman on CNN taking on the right wing and fighting for the progressive agenda when most Democrats went into hiding.
There aren't many Dems willing to be out front and face the right head-on. He's also one of the few who are advocating for public financing of campaigns.
If we don't keep the pressure on we'll lose what we gained in '06.
April 1, 2007 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
"There aren't many Dems willing to be out front and face the right head-on."
Oh there are, cept the MSM won't invite them on the teevee.
Obama knows there's too much monied interest in politics too -- so it's a shame Zimmerman decided NOT to support Obama, but instead went with our biggest for sale candidate - Hillary.
April 1, 2007 1:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks flavius.
I have heard the '50state strategy' phrase quite a bit but never knew what it meant. I also knew that emanuel disagreed with it. I like Deans idea. Thanks for the details.
April 1, 2007 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, that's "interesting." But what about the 10.2 million he got from non-corporatist, non-PAC donors, i.e., the people, quaint and old-fashioned as that word may sound? That's not just interesting; it's hopeful. Keep this up, Dean, and someday we may have a party that's true to its name.
April 2, 2007 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink