So now Sam Pratt is going to use the same tired line that the Republicans use against our candidates, that their money comes from somewhere else? Julian Schreibman has raised a lot of money from a wide range of contributors in and out of the district and has put $100,000 of his own money into the pot. Joel Tyner allegedly has $8000 in the bank, lives with his mother and begs for gas money since doesn't have enough money to get home from campaign appearances. Gibson has a million dollars and more to come.Which candidate has a better chance of winning?
Schreibman is smart, articulate, and reasoned. He is the right person for the job. I plan to vote for him. He is getting money from the national party because they think he can win against Gibson. That's the objective.
Hopefully this is not about someone who has more money and that they are a better choice over the other because of it. I'm probably naive, I thought it was about moral values and what an potential elected official will do when elected to office - isn't that we vote for?
Victor Mendolia shows a low level of reading comprehension in his post above.As noted explicitly in my post (which one suspects he did not bother to read before throwing this tantrum) it is precisely because the Republicans will make the issue of where Schreibman's money comes from that Democrats need to balance the value of such funding with the political liability it also brings.If Schreibman were able to raise money within the district, he would not be vulnerable to such criticism. And in point of fact the money that each has raised within CD-19 is actually not that different.--S.
As I mentioned on a FB thread, candidate donations are a good indicator of local voter support. The fewer donations from the district that a candidate is running in -as opposed to outside that district- the less local support that a candidate has and the poorer he/she will do at the polls. One would think that the local and county Democratic Committees would have figured out by now -having money in the bank doesn't guarantee anything. Campaign tactics that are the most physically and mentally demanding (the kind that have gotten Joel Tyner elected over and over again) are also the most effective. Let's see if Schreibman is willing to go door to door as opposed to taking the easy way out and buying advertising time.