Posted by Frank James at 7:39 CDT
Glenn Thrush, a reporter in the Washington bureau of Newsday, a Tribune newspaper, has an interesting story in tomorrow's paper about Sen. Hillary Clinton's cash-starved, Democratic primary challenger, Jonathan Tasini. Read it below.
By Glenn Thrush
Newsday Washington Bureau
Washington -- Jonathan Tasini is a rebel without a nest egg.
Hillary Rodham Clinton’s anti-war challenger in the Democratic primary has nearly sapped his $50,000 life savings in a thus-far futile attempt to draw the pro-war senator into a public debate about Iraq.
“That money’s gone,” said Tasini, munching on a turkey club earlier this week at a tavern near City Hall.
“It was my emergency money, in case god-forbid I got sick. But it’s no big deal. I’ve lived in a rent-stabilized apartment for 19 years and I don’t have kids, so I have relatively low cost of living.”
With the primary less than two weeks away, the cash-strapped Tasini may have lost his last chance at confronting Clinton face-to-face. Yesterday, the state League of of Women Voters scuttled the debate after Clinton refused to accept an invitation to the Sept. 6 event. (An earlier debate on NY1 News was scrapped because the station thought Tasini didn’t raise enough cash to be considered a serious contender.)
“These are candidate-driven things and so far we haven’t heard from Sen. Clinton,” said Barbara Bartoletti, legislative director for the league. “It’s disappointing... But when these incumbents get so far ahead they don’t want to debate.”
Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said the senator wants to see how “the campaign develops” before agreeing to a debate.
“I don’t know why she’sscared of me,” Tasini, 49, said.
Asked if Clinton was afraid of squaring off over the war, Wolfson scoffed, “Sen. Clinton talks about the war all the time.”
Tasini, a garrulous labor organizer and writer who sports cowboy boots and blocky tortoiseshell glasses, is is speck in Clinton’s political rear-view mirror. He trails her by an 86-to-10 percent margin in a Quinnipiac University Poll released last week; A recent Marist Poll shows his support at 15 percent.
Despite his backing of gay marriage, Canadian-style government-funded health care and his call for immediate troop withdrawal, Tasini has failed to make so much as a ripple in Democratic national politics, even among those who think Clinton is conservative.
Part of Tasini’s problem is that he had no experience as a fundraiser and no profile in the party before the race. Another problem is that local Democrats, who overwhelmingly oppose the war, are either afraid of crossing the senator or accept her explanation that setting a withdrawal date could jeopardize the troops.
Tasini says it’s unfair to compare him to Connecticut upstart Ned Lamont, a peace candidate who spent $4 million of his family fortune to beat Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary. Lamont also had the support of MoveOn.org, which opposes the war but hasn’t thrown its support to Tasini.
All this may explain why Tasini for New York gets about a third of its cash from the cash-poor candidate himself. He’s only raised about $102,000 from actual contributors, a fraction of what Clinton spends on catering and car-parking for fundraisers each year.
So far, Tasini has loaned his campaign $30,000, money he never expects to recover. In addition, he’s paid $13,244 for venue rentals, food and supplies and isn’t sure he’ll ever recover that cash either. And he still has to cover expenses for the last week or so of campaigning up to the Sept. 12 primary.
“Maybe I should have spent more time developing a fundraising apparatus,” he muses. “But the people I know aren’t rich corporate lawyers or celebrities. I honestly don’t know what I would have done differently.”
• 
• 
• 
Comments
The issue glanced on here is something that's bothered me for years.
With the money that's required to run for public office, and the full cavity search of all things past, forward and sideways -- who in their right mind would run for office other than trust fund babies with nothing better to do, or ego-maniacs?
(Be kind, I took the high road and mentioned no names)
Seriously, I think there's a brain drain of leadership.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | August 29, 2006 8:43 PM
Who ever thought that Hillary would be considered the canidate on the right (relatively speaking) of the political spectrum?
Posted by: Terry | August 29, 2006 9:38 PM
Kenny, welcome to campaigning in the modern era, where only the rich get to play. Blair Hull, Jack Ryan, Ned Lamont, Bob Corker, Michael Huffington all had the scratch to fund their own campaigns and went out and did it. None of them have won (yet) but with the trend of more millionaires not raising a single dime and running expensive, sophisticated campaigns I can't see how in the future running for office won't singlehandedly become the province of the rich.
McCain - Feingold does have a "millionaire" exemption where if a general election candidate dips too heavily into his personal war chest, then all fund-raising limits for the opponent go out the window. But I don't see how that can really limit the rich from spending their way to power more often.
It's funny Hillary is the 300 pound gorilla in this instance. It was Hillary's abuses of soft money in her original Senate campaign that prompted many of the reforms contained in McCain-Feingold. Now she's on the other side.
p.s. If you're an extreme leftist and Moveon.org won't endorse you it might be time to hang 'em up.
Posted by: Bill | August 29, 2006 10:50 PM
Terry, I don't have a problem getting my head around that one.
Posted by: Juanito | August 30, 2006 6:41 AM
The fact that Moveon.org isn't supporting people like Tasini speaks volumes about that organization.
Posted by: Juanito | August 30, 2006 6:48 AM
Rumfeld is an idiot that should resign with Cheney and Bush.Get rid of the 3 stooges.
Posted by: Jack Black | August 30, 2006 7:30 AM
Well, Terry, it's like Carol Moseley Braun; when Dick Durbin was elected, Carol, all of a sudden, became the conservative senator from Illinois!
Posted by: Dave Brann | August 30, 2006 8:13 AM
Obviously the Democratic Party has many factions,Liberal,Centrist,Progressive,etc.
And they all are free to speak out on the issues as they wish.
Contrast that to the wing nut party,where if you crossed Adolf DeLay,you paid a severe price.
Example.Cong.Ney from Ohio(another crook from that state)would not step down,as he will be indicted shortly,continued to insist he had done nothing wrong.
With him running,the wing nuts were in danger of losing a safe seat in Ohio.
Then,House Majority Leader Adolf Boehner from Ohio,threatened Ney that he will never get a spot on K Street,and Ney promptly stepped down.
Sounds a little like Warren Jeffs people?
Posted by: Raving Loon | August 30, 2006 9:41 AM
Crazy Duck,
Is centrist singular or plural in the democratic party?
The pro-life democrats either convert or are abandonded. Speak out supporting the war in Iraq like your 2000 vice-preseidential canidate and you are tossed out on your ear. Speak out in support of school vouchers, you're gone.
Diversity in the democratic just is in race, not in thought.
Posted by: Terry | August 30, 2006 1:49 PM
Dave, great point with CMB.
The thing I can't figure out is how the democrats don't appeal to the NASCAR crowd. After all, all they do is left turns:)
Posted by: Terry | August 30, 2006 1:51 PM
Terry...coming from the south..I guess I'll speak for the NASCAR crowd..we like republicans cause they go round and round in circles.
Posted by: bill r. | August 30, 2006 9:29 PM