In a perfect world, candidates for elected office would offer modest, sincere speeches and the best man or woman would win.
Whether we like it or not, politics requires significant funding. While few argue that it’s a perfect system, the Democrats often love to maintain a preposterous assumption of having the moral highground. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Harry Reid and a litany of other nefarious liberals have often ranted and raved about the supposed corruption of the Republican Party who dares to accept money from a variety of sources, including the Koch Brothers, the boogeymen of the left.
Still, as these grandstanding liberals rant and rave about the supposedly corrupting influence of money in politics, they eagerly solicit funds from liberal billionaires like Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg and George Soros. They also eagerly solicit the backing of labor unions whose leaders are nothing but professional extortionists- a modern-day, legal mafia.
This election cycle, however, expect grandiose statements and absurd pleas for cash from Democrats as not only does the Democratic National Committee (DNC) not have the campaign war-chest that the Republicans do, they are actually running in the red.
It appears that the Democrats run their committee like how they ran our country as the DNC, shamefully, holds $4.7 million cash on hand for the upcoming election while also holding $6.9 million in debts, putting the DNC in the red to the tune of $2.2 million according to FEC records.
In contrast, the Republican National Committee (RNC) holds a sizeable war-chest with $20 million on hand with $1.8 million in debts owed.
So far during this election cycle, Democrats have raised $53.2 million, a sum that might sound sizeable until compared to the Republicans who have raised $89.3 million. The RNC raised $8.7 million in October, a record for presidential off-year fundraising.
In comparison, the DNC raised $4.5 million in October, but spent a whopping $5.2 million during the same month.
Election strategist Ron Bonjean summarized the numbers and explained,
“What is clear is that the future Republican presidential nominee can count on strong support from its party while the Democrats will have to resort to only relying on outside resources because the DNC simply can’t get its act together.”
Though the race is long, these numbers paint a telling picture. The DNC has, for years, operated recklessly. The Democrat message has long been “just try it our way,” but after $18 trillion in debt, countless constitutional tramplings and a slipping of American prestige on the world stage, it’s clear that Democrats have delivered America from a “bad” situation to a “worse” situation and trust in Democratic leadership (as well as financial contributions) are way down.
What the DNC’s failure illustrates above all else, however, is the lackluster candidate field they are offering to the constituents. With the only two remotely-viable Democratic candidates being a wild-eyed Socialist and a corrupt double-speaking felon, the choices for Democrats are remarkably poor.
When viewed in this context, it is little wonder why the Republicans maintain the monetary advantage; who wants to donate their hard-earned money to this liberal circus?