From The Olympian (or the Times if you prefer) comes this nugget on the financial aftermath of the contested goobernor's election: the state party Democrats are about 600K in the hole, but the Republicans are in it even deeper--around $1 million. What's the difference between them, beyond 400 grand? Not much, really; they both seem to have a typically distorted view of things.
The Democrats? They're panicking, as well any party might that just won a legal challenge to the executive office, now controls the entire legislature, and represents the head of a building wave of Northwest anti-Republicanism:
Gregoire's fundraising letter, which was mailed earlier this month by the state Democratic Party to solicit donations for its legal defense fund, warned it "could cripple us going into the midterm U.S. senatorial, congressional and legislative elections."
600K is going to cripple them 15 months from now? Did Maria Cantwell suddenly lose the three million bucks she had on hand in July? And even if she did, I'm still updating my RealPlayer, so I'm sure she's got the coin in leftover stock options to cover it if need be. So forgive my raised eyebrow and rolling eyes, to see Gregoire pull out the poormouth routine.
On the other hand, despite being around twice as much in debt, having no statewide incumbencies or majorities to rely on, relatively weak candidates for candidacies, and looking quite a bit like a state party in some disarray, the picture looks rosy if you're wearing your WSRP glasses:
"Obviously we have a debt to pay off. It's a serious situation, but it will not under any circumstances cripple us. Our lawyers understand we will pay them as funds become available," Vance said. He added that "it will have absolutely no impact on what we do next year."
"The only effect it could have is burning out our donors. I don't think that's going to happen," Vance added. "The people who donate to the state candidate fund are different than those who donate for anything else."
If I'm working in Accounts Receivable at any of the GOP's law firms, that "we'll pay them as funds become available" bit puts a chill down my spine. Who knows when they'll pull a Bush-at-Fort-Knox and tell their lawyers, "Heh--these retainer contracts we signed? Worthless! Paper IOUs, I tell you!" Being the party of obscene wealth, and having plenty of obscenely wealthy constituents to rely on, I can get behind Chris Vance's belief that the money will come. But this is as low as the Republicans have been in some time in apple country, and they'll need every dollar they can get their hands on. The GOP likes to have at least double the Democrats in their races; that alleviates the need to cheat. (Boooo, hiss, partisan rhetoric!)
This isn't much of a major story, but I thought I'd follow up with the aftermath of the months-long contest--it cost both parties a bundle, and of course the GOP has to be smarting on the basis of being further in debt and also having LOST after spending all that money. At least Paul Berendt can look to the Governor's Mansion and consider the outlay well worth it. He needs a little help with playground style "scoreboard!" taunting, though:
"I suspect [Rossi's] not going to lift a finger for them. Why would one think he's going to be effective in this? I think Republicans are conservative by nature, and they don't like paying for a dead horse."
Uh, what? One usually beats a dead horse, rather than paying for it--if they do anything with it beyond calling Elmer's* for pickup. How hard would it have been to graciously suggest that Rossi would do everything he can to raise funds for the next unsuccessful election challenge?
*the glue factory, not the restaurant...!
--TJ
Comments