GOP, behind Dems in money race, gets help from Bush

The National Republican Congressional Committee, which has lagged far behind its Democratic counterpart in fundraising this election cycle, went some distance toward closing that gap tonight –- with some help from President Bush.

With Bush headlining this evening's dinner at the Washington Hilton Hotel, the GOP's House campaign operation reports receipts of more than $8.6 million. The one-night haul exceeds the $6.4 million total cash on hand the party committee reported at the end of January.

Although low in the national polls, Bush remains popular among the party faithful and has raised in excess of $50 million for the party in the last year.

“The Democrats have piled up an abysmal record of broken promises, higher taxes and a liberal agenda that is out of step with the majority of Americans,” said Rep. Tom Cole, the Oklahoma Republican who chairs the NRCC. “With the funds raised tonight, we will be able to move forward in our efforts to rebuild a Republican majority.”

The NRCC, which helps find, train and fund Republican congressional candidates, still has a fair distance to go to catch the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which reported $35.5 million cash on hand at the end of January.

The fundraising difference can make a real difference on the ground. Over the weekend in Illinois, the Democrats' ability to match the Republicans dollar for dollar in the 14th Congressional District race helped them wrest former Speaker Dennis Hastert's seat from the GOP in a special election.

--Matthew Hay Brown

Matthew Hay Brown writes for the Swamp for the Chicago Tribune's Washington Bureau.

Photo credit: KRISTOFFER TRIPPLAAR / EPA

Comments

[Kordo]

Solution:

I have an idea for how to resolve this mess, one that will utilize both candidate's strengths, and give them both a job they can really sink their teeth into. Bear with me for a moment:

The President, despite his billing as "the Leader of the Free World", dosen't really make domestic policy. He/She can say yes or no to bills, can issue executive orders to federal agencies, and has clout when it comes to supreme court nominees. Oh, yeah, he/she can order the military to kill pretty much whomever, though that's not really a domestic matter (we hope). Her/His job, as I see it, is to make speeches, glad-hand/smack-down foreign leaders, and use the bully pulpit to motivate the nation. This requires you to have, if not the love of your political opponents, at least their faith that you won't automatically dismiss their concerns. Even the most disagreeable folks will give a little on positions, if they feel they're getting a fair hearing.

The Senate Majority Leader has a whole different portfolio. His/Her job is to master the details of policy, guide legistlation thru congress, and force a roomful of greedy egomaniacs to at least appear to behave like adults. When it comes to actually getting things done domestically, this is where it's at. The SML must have some tact, but not so much that people feel they can buck you without getting bucked right back.

With this as my premise, and feel free to call me on it if I've missed some nuance, here's my idea:

Barack Obama was born to be President. Even-tempered, thoughtful, polite, but willing to stick to his guns on matters of principle. An inclusive, peaceful worldveiw tempered by intelligent, clear-eyed assessment of the very real (as opposed to Bush-exacerbated) threats we face. A profound, bone-deep knowledge of where our Country has failed, as well as where we have excelled. Intimate personal expierience with just how difficult it will be to get people from different cultures to see each other as more than enemies/competitors, and some damn good ideas on how to accomplish that Herculean task. And the guy can give one hell of a speech :)

Hillary Clinton was born to be Senate Majority Leader. Absolute master of policy detail, tough as a nail, impossible to intimidate, and deeply committed to making life better for the average guy/gal. Tina Fey was right: we need a hard-core Bitch in that job after "Ol' Toothless" Harry Reid, someone to go in there and whip those prima-donnas into shape. Think about it; you are a minority Republican who wants to ram some bit of pet legistlation thru Congress. With Obama, no disrespect to the man, but he's young and polite, and that gives a hard-edged Pol some wiggle room. With Hillary, you'd better have yer ducks in a row, and yer shit together. Step to that Lady with anything less than a closely-reasoned, voter-supported, and realistically effective argument, and she's gonna hand you your guts in a bucket. Raise your hand if you think Bush would have been able to pull half the crap he has if Hillary had been SML, with a majority Dem senate, and no Presidential campaign to worry about? She'd have had that chimp roasting over a slow fire! (I hereby forego my right to hound her about the Iraq vote; considering the political enviroment at the time, I can't say I'd have done different. )

Hillary is bad at speeches, she hates glad-handing, and she's not shy about letting people know she's the smartest person in the room. She's utterly committed to fighting for her principles, and she's about the last person you'd want to cross on a substantive policy issue. Is there a better job description you think she'd fit? Did I mention she's impossible to intimidate?

Barack is a natural consensus-builder, he has gut-level understanding of the damage entrenched attitudes can do to a Polity, and he has shown by his actions that he will see to it that every political faction will have a voice in our government, without allowing any particular group to ride roughshod over the other. Add to that his personal expierience as a poly-ethnic American, his deep understanding of the global culture beyond our borders, and his stated willingness to put the smack-hand down on our so-called friends-who-aren't-really-friendly in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. Plus, he can give a frakkin speech! imagine a President who doesn't make you cringe when he opens his mouth?

I realize that this solution puts the onus of compromise on Hillary, and I know that she and many of her supporters will find it lacking because of that. But I do think that if we, as Democrats, will take the longer veiw, we'll realize that it gives us the best shot at putting a progressive stamp on US policy for the next generation. Health care, supreme court appointees, global military policy, all of these issues....

Keith Olbermann was right. We can't afford to destroy ourselves, and I regret some (most) of my rash and impolite statements on this site. I'm not gonna vote for McCain no matter who gets the Dem nod. I think we have a bigger fight on our hands. I'd really like to hear some comments on this, as I think it's a good, or at least workable, Idea.

Kordo

[What's his face]

Hey Kordo.....Get with the program...subject is raising funds for GOP. Your fary tale just wont cut it.