Tweet
No wonder the Cunningham adviser didn’t want to put his/her name on this unbelievable quote:
“When you are in a three-way Democratic primary with a female statewide office holder and an African American it makes it difficult to raise money no matter how good you are,” said one Cunningham adviser.
So blacks and women are keeping the white man Cal down!? That is mindblowingly craptastic “advising.” What could possibly motivate some unnamed aide to utter this on behalf of Cal Cunningham? A clue here:
Former state senator Cal Cunningham, national Democrats’ preferred nominee against Sen. Richard Burr (R) this fall, raised just $345,000 in his first three months of active campaigning — a sum that raises questions about his ability to win the May 4 primary.“In a multi-candidate primary, the candidate with the momentum in the last weeks almost always emerges on top,” argued Cunningham campaign manager Rick Fromberg in a memo sent to reporters Wednesday night.
Cunningham will face off against Secretary of State Elaine Marshall and attorney Ken Lewis among others in next month’s primary. Polling suggests that Marshall is the favorite in that race thanks to name identification built up over her 14 years in her current post.
Neither Marshall nor Lewis have starred in the race for campaign cash either, however. Marshall brought in just $163,000 from Jan. 1 to March 31 while Lewis raised just $109,000. Burr, by contrast, raked in $1.57 million in the year’s first fundraising quarter.
The short story: the DSCC is was looking for a MUCH higher number from Cal (some say a $1M take), and, well, Lewis is black, Marshall’s a woman and since there’s surely nothing wrong with Cal Cunningham as a candidate to have numbers so low, blame it on minorities and women not recognizing the greatness of our candidate — it’s not fair……wahhhhhh. That can’t be a serious strategy for winning.
The hallmark of a campaign in the throw-everything-at-the-wall phase. The thing is, the Cunningham campaign is still at a significant money advantage and it still manages to shoot itself in the foot with the downtrodden white man comment. I don’t get it. Of course, the same whining came from the John Edwards campaign back in the day. Sigh – we know how that all worked out.
***
To get back to the subject of the Cunningham campaign and the LGBT community, that Wed memo to reporters hit my inbox, and in it, Cal and Co are still touting that Replacements Ltd PAC endorsement.
Yes that same endorsement that candidates Marshall and Lewis were not allowed to compete for. That renders it worthless, and calls into question why the PAC decided not to entertain comparisons between the candidates. I have no idea, but the Cunningham campaign is still being disingenous in trying to say he has some bulk of LGBT support that he has no basis to claim. From the memo:
Endorsements – Cal has earned endorsements from a wide variety of key groups that share our Democratic values and believe Cal is the best candidate to take on Richard Burr. The North Carolina Association of Educators endorsed Cal for his strong plan to invest in our schools. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters endorsed Cal for his record of standing up for working families. The Sierra Club endorsed Cal for his plans to create clean energy jobs and his record on environmental issues. Vote Vets and General Wesley Clark endorsed Cal for his military expertise. And Replacements LTD PAC endorsed Cal for his stance on protecting equal rights and ending LGBT discrimination. Also, The Winston-Salem Journal backed Cal’s campaign, writing “We endorse Cal Cunningham in the Democratic primary for the Senate. Should the general election pit him against Burr, we could expect a lively race that, we hope, would focus on key issues such as veterans’ services and health-care reform.”
As Blenders know, we’ve had all sorts of trouble trying to get Cal here to actually state his views on “equal rights and ending LGBT discrimination,” so sending questionable statements out to reporters, who are unlikely to question that statement is again, problematic and worthy of asking him.
That’s right — remember, Cal Cunningham has finally agreed to do the liveblog; it is scheduled for Sunday, April 25 at 7PM ET.
11 Comments
On FundraisingOn fundraising Elaine, Cal, and Ken are relatively close together as compared to Burr. A lot of donors just don’t want to get involved in an off year election until the primary is over is what I think is going on rather than any other nonsense explanation.
Luckily Elaine is polling strongest against Burr, strongest in the primary too, and is also the best on LGBT issues. Republican incumbent Richard Burr is actively anti-LGBT equality.
All that said, Cal is better than Burr by far on LGBT issues, and Cal has spoken out more on LGBT issues than Hagan ever did or any US Senator from NC ever.
From his website:
On DADT repeal:
There is obviously a lot of work to do, mostly on their end, but I hope that we can use the liveblog to ask important questions, and educate/advocate on issues important to us. Both Elaine and Ken updated their LGBT issues sections after doing the liveblog I believe. Cunningham may be late to the game, but I hope that he will leave the liveblog with better stances on LGBT issues than he entered with since there is a real chance we are going to pick between him and actively anti-gay Burr come November. DADT repeal only needs a few more supporters on the Senate Armed Services committee on which Burr currently sits and on which Cunningham would almost certainly sit.
Cal, if he wins, may well vote on UAFA next year and I think there is some real room to get his campaign to take a stand there.
(I voted for Elaine yesterday, but despite the Cunningham campaigns missteps, I still think we should approach the liveblog as an opportunity)
agreed on the issuesIt’s important to see that Cal comes to the table with positions still unstated on his web site.
My post illustrates how his campaign is stumbling on easy stuff. He needs to have a better sense of messaging coming out of his campaign if he goes on to if he wants to defeat Burr.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Vote: Federal version for NC votersIf the US Senate and US House — with their historic majorities — don’t deliver the lowest of the low-hanging fruit (DADT) for the LGBT community by November, send the federal Democrats into the minority.
Don’t vote for federal Democrats in November.
The state-level NC Democrats continue to deliver for the LGBT community, so get out and vote for them.
I’ve had enough of this horseshit from federal Democrats.
Listen up, Federal Democrats. You want a price to pay? This loyal Democratic voter will be voting for the GOP in the US Senate and US House races if DADT repeal isn’t law by November 2, 2010. I’ve got plenty of loyal voters that feel the same way.
Clear enough?
Don’t give me any more horseshit about how Cunningham or some other DSCC puppet is better than Burr. A US Senate full of 60, now 59, Democratic Senators hasn’t been better than a US Senate with Burr in the majority.
Repeal DADT, or enjoy returning to the minority.
Get out and vote for state-level seatsHunter’s right — Dems down the ticket have performed and they shouldn’t be punished for the lack of performance by federal level officials, who seem by far to have weaker spines and obsession with being re-elected (i.e. “safe”).
And we don’t need a lesser of two evils candidate in this state, and I don’t mean this race – we should never be faced with that in a state starting to stay solidly purple.
So you are saying if it comes down to a choice between Elaine Marshall who did a liveblog on PamsHouseBlend and has done a few on BlueNC and who has been the only candidate to take on DOMA repeal or UAFA, whose other pro-lgbt stances are written below, and when removing Burr could make the difference on the Senate Armed Services committee on DADT repeal, and with Elaine having received the PHB endorsement, and we shouldn’t vote for Elaine for US Senate b/c she’s running for US Senate?
Equality NC & the democrats in NC delivered NC our first pro-lgbt legislation ever, in the form of the anti-bullying bill which applies for all LGBTs, last year. They were only able to do that by 1 vote. If we had one less democrat, even though several who voted for it are hardly gay rights champions, we’d still have no pro-lgbt legislation in our state.
I think we have to take a very nuanced approach to when we vote to punish dems and when we make targeted votes. Elaine right now has taken more pro-lgbt rights stances than any candidate running for US Senate from NC in the history of North Carolina, so I can absolutely pull the lever for her come November. For Cal, we’ll see how the live blog goes, and if we can get his campaign to take stances on more issues like UAFA.
Music to Obama & Rahm & Messina’s ears
Keep playing right into their hand if you choose.
They think we’ll just keep on voting for more federal Democrats no matter how little they do. I will not be a party to it.
I haven’t missed a primary, runoff or general election for any office from President to Soil & Water Conservation Board in my life.
Despite my affection for Elaine/Cal/Ken or my distaste for Burr, I swear I will do everything in my power to punish all federal Democrats if DADT isn’t law by November 2.
That is my leverage over every senator sitting on the Armed Services committee who isn’t putting DADT in the Def Auth bill right now — whether they are up for election this year or not.
I urge everyone all over the country to do the same to their own Democratic senators and Democratic senate candidates.
Tell your Democratic US Senator you’ll work to put them in the minority if they don’t get off their sorry asses and repeal DADT immediately.
Even a majority of conservatives polled say they support repealing DADT.
The only thing they fear worse than not being re-elected is being in the minority.
Elaine Marshall (D) Supports DADT repealand wants to be our next senator to replace Richard Burr (R) who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee and opposes DADT repeal. Kay Hagan (D) sits in the Senate Armed Services committee and is one of the publicly committed yes votes on the Military Readiness Enhancement Act to repeal DADT.
Borrowing from Clarknt67 on DailyKos
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
The GOP is almost in lockstep against us, and the Dems are mostly for DADT repeal. We should absolutely send those Dems packing who vote against us, and even the ones to afraid to take a stand either way. But on this committee that gets to decide whether DADT repeal is a part of the defense authorization bill, where we need 15 votes, we have 11 votes & there are some unknowns, switching out Elaine for Burr could make the difference. If Elaine wins the primary I am going to be actively supporting her. I can understand why you might not want to actively support her, but I hope wont actively work to punish her.
When life inside the veal pen grows tiresome…I’ll welcome you to the outside.
Federal Democratic leaders count on your “don’t punish your local Democrat” philosophy to keep you in check.
I will punish the party that fails to handle this lowest of the low-hanging fruit with polling and freakin’ Dick Cheney solidly providing cover.
If Elaine is the nominee in NC, she had better have the DC power brokers handle this DADT business by budget time unless she wants an active Democrat working against her.
Whoever the Democratic nominee is in Indiana, I hope the folks in Indiana are making sure they scare the hell out of the DC power brokers by pledging to defeat the Democratic candidate unless the DC leadership gets off its ass and DADT is repealed now.
And so on around the country.
By the by, you’re making a lot of assumptions about members of Senate Armed Services Committee next year. Burris, Kaufman, Bayh, and other changes will happen no matter who is the new majority leader.
What incentive doesElaine, Cal, or Ken have by doing their liveblogs here if they feel we are going to actively work against them regardless of what they say, or what stances they take on the issues?
I have a lot less trust for many democrats than I used to, but Elaine I trust.
Why do you need a liveblog now?Elaine – liveblog check
Ken – liveblog check
Cal – is that flip-flopping DSCC tool really an option (and not just on LGBT issues)?
There’s no need to get anybody “on record” — their records are clear.
Re-read this part:
Senator Levin from Michigan would much rather remain Chairman of Armed Services rather than become the ranking minority member. Make him work to keep his chairmanship. He can get his committee members to fall in line on DADT repeal or lose his powerful perch in the Senate.
It looks like I’llbe spending some time with my family this evening and wont be able to make it for the liveblog. I hope you’ll be able to ask my UAFA question again, perhaps with emphasis on the fact that this issue may be voted on this or next year, which makes it all the more important that a stance is taken on it now.