Skip to main content

View Diary: Trippi Op-Ed in the WSJ: Yes. Yes. Yes! (276 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It was bold for Dean - (none)
    given the small amounts of a high percentage of his contributions meant that he was waiving a huge amount of money in matching funds.  It was also a reason why as soon as he began to falter and his contributions dried up that he was so quickly broke.  It would be interesting to see a spreadsheet on the the candidates - money raised plus matching funds.  Dean may have raised $50 million but when you have five opponents all going after you and each funded with somewhere around $20 million, that $50 million isn't quite as formidable.

    Kerry gave up far less in matching funds at the time of his decision than Dean did because he was more reliant on large donors.  And it's not like he was going to lose his house given the fact that his wife is worth at least $500 million.  Doubt we'll ever know if Kerry made this decision on his own, recognizing that he could never hope to beat GWB if hamstrung by this funding limitation as Dean recognized, or if this was the point where the Party insiders stepped in and made the decision to settle on Kerry and require this move.  The one thing that is clear is that as soon as Dean made his decision to pass on matching funds, this would be a factor in the primary race because Democrats would quickly come to appreciate that accepting matching funds would handicap our nominee.  Where the Dean team failed on this was to make it an issue -- pointing out to voters how much this had hurt Gore in 2000 and letting this make Gephardt and Edwards not  viable candidates in Iowa instead of running competing attack ads with Gephardt.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site