I'm a Barack supporter, but a few days back I registered at Hillary's Web site in a failed attempt to joke that I had heard New Mexico mattered. Regardless, I used my real e-mail address and have since received her campaign messages (addressed to Ronald McDonald). I was not terribly surprised to learn that she exhibits the same vice in her e-mails as she does on the stump: namely, arrogance.
Dear Ronald,
my e-mail begins.
Here's what you need to know this morning. We were outspent in Wisconsin by a 4 to 1 margin on ads -- and we can't let that happen on March 4.
We, the Clinton campaign, would have easily won Wisconsin had you cheapskates dished out more coin. Don't let it happen again tightwads!
If we want to win in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Vermont, we've got to even the odds. We can't let the Obama campaign overwhelm us financially. Today, I am calling on you and other online supporters to act together, making sure we have the resources to create a fair, level playing field on March 4.
The way Obama gathers funds is completely unfair. If you want this to be a fair race,
Contribute now to help us level the playing field.
I said now. Stop wasting your time checking e-mail... give me money now. Politeness is for pantywastes.
Let this remarkable two-person contest for the Democratic nomination be determined by the strength of our ideas, the quality of our leadership, or the depth of our experience. But whatever you do, don't let the outcome of these crucial March 4 contests be decided by a lopsided spending advantage for the Obama campaign.
Only you -- our incredible online community -- can act quickly and decisively enough to create a level playing field. And with everything on the line, that's exactly what I'm asking you to do.
We're putting everything on the line. Contribute now.
Do you get it? We're working really hard. Y'all ain't doin shit. Get your ass in gear. Did I mention now?
The rest is stock support-me-speak. Let's fight the "avalanche" of Obama advertising. March 4 will be a day of dramatic victory for us. We need you to give us money, and now.
I have no problem with the idea of this message. Barack's e-mails also ask to contribute now. But I get the sense from Hillary, as I often do when I hear her speak, that once again it's not her fault that she's losing. Usually she blames a state's voting format, a state's demographic, a state's typical party affiliation, even a state's significance (the definition of elitism), but now I get the sense she's blaming her supporters for not turning out funds in the record pace that Obama folks are. And it's got to be a tough message to swallow: She raised $10 million in the first 10 days of this month! Were it not for Obama, she would have the most generous donors in the history of American politics. How can she blame them for her depreciating lot?
And given her recent surge in funds, donors have to be wondering where the money's going. She claimed to be matching Barack's fundraising tit for tat early this month, so there's no good reason to be outspent 4-to-1 in Wisconsin. Least of which is that donors didn't give enough. I suspect the reasons are that much of that money went to pay off debt (such as her loan to herself) and that her campaign was never too interested in winning Wisconsin anyway.
I also include the possibility that I'm making way too much from a few lines in a fundraising e-mail. But I'm curious if any of Hillary's supporters are getting the feeling that they're now being thrown under the bus.
(btw, I'm a first-time diarist and fairly new member. The handle is not meant to be derogatory; it's an old Web handle that I've found gets a lot of attention.)