The DCCC Claims It Spent Its Money Well... Did It? (from DWT)

[FLAprogressive]

from DownWithTyranny:

"How effectively did the DCCC spend money last year? If "effectively" has anything whatsoever to do with enhancing chances that the Democratic Party will be in a position to help protect working families against the corporate predators represented by the GOP, there is only one answer: not very effectively at all.

Since the DCCC has already declared, wrong-headedly, that the 2010 cycle will focus on incumbent protection rather than on expanding their majority in the House, let's take a look at the work they did on incumbents in 2008. The candidate who was the #1 recipient of their Independent Expenditures for the year was right-wing Democrat Travis Childers of Mississippi-- $1,208,918 (+ another $1,651,337 in negative campaigning against his wingnut opponent, Greg Davis), although some of this money was spent in a special election and some was spent in November. Still, according to Progressive Punch's report on voting records for 2008, Childers was the Democrat who voted most frequently with the Republicans for their agenda against his own party's attempts to protect working families. No one was worse, not even Nick Lampson (TX), John Barrow (GA), Don Cazayoux (LA) or Jim Marshall (GA), the Republicans' Trojan horses within the Democratic caucus. Democrats spent more to win and save this reactionary Mississippi bastion than on any other district in the entire country and the result is a "Democrat" who will continue to vote against Democratic Party priorities and drag the caucus further and further away from what Americans want from the Democrats. Van Hollen talks about how the Democrats will now work to help Obama change America. He's not naive enough to think a reactionary like Childers will be on that team."

READ MORE: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/01/dccc-claims-it-spent-its-money-well-did.html

-------

Remember -- when you donate to the DCCC....you might be donating to a right-winger.

[MasonJar]

1. I am not giving them money next time because they are not spending

it on the right priorities.

[Captain Hilts]

2. NO! And some of the Obama surplus should have been used for downticket campaigns. nt

[PassingFair]

3. I only contribute directly to Progressive representatives and candidates.

Although in an election cycle like last year,
I did donate to the DNC and the Obama campaign

I like Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriot's Fund, too.

I would NEVER give money to the DCCC or the DSCC or
the DLC. They get enough in corporate bribes.

[saracat]

6. I will only contribute directly to candidates from now on. My donations both state and nationally

were abused. I did not and will not support RW Dems and I will not support ant choice candidates.

[PassingFair]

7. I won't even support Emily's list anymore.

Although most (all?) of their candidates
are pro-choice, they do not care if the
candidate is progressive or not.

[saracat]

8. I think ALL of their candidates are "pro-choice" but I still will only support

individual candidates.

[madfloridian]

4. They recruited 12 anti-choice Democrats to run.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/3311

So I don't think they did.

They picked those with conservative views so as not to offend the religious right.

[saracat]

5. The DLC controlled interests destroyed my state and ruined the chances of

most progressive candidates for years to come. No more donations from me.