money to a candidate if: (1) an organization in the local area, (ie, tea party local orgianization/committee/community) has already vetted the background, convictions and committment to the US Constitution of that candidate and puts the information online for all of us to read; (2) that candidate has a website that is easy for us to get a good look at him/her and can look the candidate in the eyes when they are answering the values questions we all look for; (3) the candidate’s website is SECURE and we feel comfortable donating at that website and KNOW that the candidate is aware who is donating and our contributions are listed along with all donors to that candidate.

The Local Tea Party organizations, 9-12 Project organizations and conservative common sense organizations need to do their homework locally and then post the information for all of us nationwide to help the candidate(s) that have the best bet to go to DC or the Local State Capitals to actually representative our goals and values of smaller government and personal accountability of those politicians.

It doesn’t matter if the DNC raises a hundred times as much as the RNC. It doesn’t matter if George Soros fully funds the DCCC. It doesn’t matter if the dem candidate is funding his/her own campaign with deep pockets.

Banks will not support a president who want s to nationalize them. Oil companies will not support “Green Energy Maobama” and his socialist agenda. AIG will not support an administration that wants to levy a huge tax against them. America’s corporations will not support socialism. And they have the money to easily fund the opposition and put conservative candidates in office that will support a free market.

They should ask us how many of us have resolved to donate our money directly to conservative candidates rather than send it to them so they can squander it supporting RINOs like Carly Fiorina and Charlie Crist (or worse, DeDe Scuzzifava).

I strongly suspect the result will be a real eye-opener for them, and calm the fears of conservatives (and stoke the fears of liberals) that conservative candidates (as opposed to mere “republican” candidates) won’t have enough money to compete this fall.

That’s all they’ve gotten out of me. I keep getting the surveys/donation requests. I tell them I can spend my money better than them ($15.00 to process the survey??). I’ll put a stamp on the envelope, but that’s it.

If the “leadership” wants money, they had better start paying attention to the party’s BASE. Until then, the solicitaions will continue to go into the trash!

PS: Do I seem insufficiently anxious and resigned to failure? Well, it might be because I know a trend when I see it. Or maybe it’s because I’m currently on the right side of a 4-to-1 seat defense ratio. Or maybe it’s just that we watched the Democratic party pour quite a lot of money down a hole in Massachusetts.

I’m anxious to…but like another emotion we all know about…the pending election is a dish that is best served cold…and the longer it stays in the fridge the colder it will be…and the sweeter the savor!

PPS: More serious question: does the Citizens’ United case make monthly looks at fundraising totals more or less irrelevant? It just got a lot easier to fund promising candidates, on both sides.

which is as it should be…and the cooling affect on that dish to be served up in 2010 shouldn’t be ignored either!

PPPS: In a truly just world, there would be another announcement of a Democratic retirement this morning.

Not to fear…I’d expect another rat or two to leave the ship withing the next day or two as Scary Harry and San Fran Nan Continues to tilt at the HCR windmill…and Obama tosses them all under the bus during the SotU tomorrow and moves on to moderate and triangulate his way through his current difficulties at the expense of those he’s ridden into the barn and put away wet!

The “Big Tent” analogy isn’t the correct one…the correct one is a MAGNET…we need to be a MAGNET that draws these independents in who are sick and tired of what’s going on in Washington—Fred Thompson

At least when you look at Cook’s number of Tossup/Lean D seats (49) vs. the number of Tossup/Lean R seats (just 10!).

(P.S. I totally agree with Moe – this cycle is *so* not about how much money the national committees have. But I’m quite content to let Politico and the MSM use that meme to color their thinking (i.e. lull them into a false sense of security!)…)

Okay lets look at some facts here.

One, will the Democrats be able to maintain their fund raising edge? Once you’re going to start seeing heath care not passed, cap and trade not passed, and a couple of other things you’re going to have some ticked off people not donating. Are unions going to want to rush and work super hard for the group that was quite happy to impose a tax on their health care plans?

Two, as Scott Brown proved the money will come from us. We’re looking more towards the candidate first and than just maybe the three committees. And we’re still the in progress of trying to weed out candidates we don’t want such as Crist in Florida or Fiorra in California. Once we weed out we can focus on improving the money.

Three, money is no edge for Democrats when they are clearly being blamed for the problem. In 2008 Democrats were winning because they were going to fix the problem. Now it’s their turn to have them being the problem. A voter will go to the booth just to pull the lever for the Republican.
In this environment a lot of the candidate who lost in 2008 would’ve won. The democrats have the problem candidates who would’ve won will lose (Boxer running less than 50% is a sign of things to come)

Four, the key thing about money is get them enough to be competitive. We’ve shown that people to the candidates are making that happen despite the lack of the help the committees are getting

Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN