The Democratic Party's traditional campaign role is being largely taken over by a new group called "Americans Coming Together," which has been launched with two $10 million donations from financier George Soros and Peter B. Lewis, chairman of the Progressive Corporation. The new organization wants to raise $94 million to finance a massive campaign against Bush - all with soft money.
The Democratic Party, which is only allowed to raise hard money (donations limited to $2,000 per person) by the McCain-Feingold law is unable to amass the resources necessary for a national campaign, so it is ceding the main role to Americans Coming Together.
Apparently, the Clark campaign is taking a big dumparoony and Hillary is afraid that Dean will get the nomination and kick McAuliff of the highchair. Meanwhile, taking all of her and Bill's Chinese money down with him in his loss to Bush 2004. So she is putting all her money next to George Soros' wad in the ACT group to sheild it from the Deaners.
If anyone out there knows, I would like to find out if you can take a group like ACT and turn it into its own party and still keep the $$$. I've been trying to research this, but I'm coming up with nuttin'.
If she can, she will. I can see it now "Hillary in 2008 on the ACT Party ticket"
Posted by AnalogKid at November 26, 2003 01:40 AM | TrackBack"at least i hope"
then what happens? Only republicans run for office? Or are we looking for an all-out Republican Regime?
Posted by: bsti on November 26, 2003 03:30 AMI saw recently on Drudge that apparantly, a lot of the money Dean is getting is coming from Republicans. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Posted by: AtomicLawyer on November 26, 2003 08:21 AMNaw B, read the bottom line. A new party opens up.
Or the Republicans go up againt the Libertarians.
Posted by: analog kid on November 26, 2003 10:13 AMDrudge had a report that Kerry's campaign was saying that republicans were funding Dean. The ultimate put down in their circles. Like saying that Dean would be easier to beat than Kerry in the general election, and like saying Dean takes money from Satan. They see it as a two fer.
The gaol isn't a one party state b, it's just to win this year and the next. If the democratic party implodes, it'll be because they were stupid and fell of their own weight. Politics as we practice it is the purest form of Darwinism. Any void left by such a breakup wouldn't be empty for long, you would just see the birth of new parties. The GOP would simply be the dominant one for a while, like the dems during FDR's time. But it wouldn't last forever. It's simply how it works.
Were we a one party state in the thirties? A banana republic? We survived FDR, the closest we ever came to having a King, we are doing fine, and are far more resilient than that.
Posted by: Mark (puggs) on November 26, 2003 11:07 AMThe historical precedent is the Republican Party itself. In 1860 the conservative party was the Democrats, the liberal party was the Whigs, and the Republicans were the largest 3rd party (they were extremely leftwing for the standards of the day). When Lincoln won, the Whig party disintegrated. Most members of the dead Whig party became Republicans with a few borderline conservatives joining the Democrats.
In the unlikely event the Democratic Party died, then the new line up would just be more of the same with different names.