Howard Dean pours extra money into four red states.

[MODU]

He has poured more money into those states, but has brought in far less money than the Republicans (plus he's been irritating his own party).  Not a good 100 days for him so far.  We'll have to see how he does in the next 100 days.

[MODU]

He has poured more money into those states, but has brought in far less money than the Republicans

Republicans always outraise the Democrats because they are the party of big business and corporate giveaways.

Democrats will never outraise Republicans.

Ahh, but that was one of the reasons behind selecting him as the chairman.  He had that gang-buster of a money raising system when running for President which has all but came to a stop these days. 

[MODU]

He has poured more money into those states, but has brought in far less money than the Republicans

Republicans always outraise the Democrats because they are the party of big business and corporate giveaways.

The stupidity of this comment is hilarious.

They are the more blatant one of America's two parties of big business and corporate giveaways.

That better, States?

Ok, that's better. Anyone who says that big business has no impact on the DNC is either naive, a liar or both.

And let's not forget the impact that the unions, civil liberty groups, et al all have on the DNC's books too.  hehehe

[MODU]

The Deaniac is at it again:

"In S.F., Dean calls GOP 'a white Christian party'"

It's a fairly decent article discussing the debate over Dean.  However, here are some recent Dean quotes worth noting:

"[Republicans are] a pretty monolithic party. They all behave the same. They all look the same. It's pretty much a white Christian party."

"The Republicans are not very friendly to different kinds of people..."

"[Republicans] never made an honest living in their lives..."

"We have to be rough on the Republicans.  Republicans don't represent ordinary Americans and they don't have any understanding of what it is to go out and try and make ends meet."

[MODU]

The Deaniac is at it again:

How is anything he said incorrect? Why is there a different standard for Democrats to criticize Republicans than there is Republicans to criticize Democrats?

Nothing wrong with criticizing . . . just criticize over real things.  The Republicans are not an almost white organization, nor built of mostly millionaires/billionaires who do not work.  There are many minority and lower to middle class people in the party, just as there are in the Democratic party.  And oddly enough, and I'll try to find the article on this again, there are more millionaires who identify themselves as Democrats than there are Republicans. 

[MODU]

[Nothing wrong with criticizing . . . just criticize over real things.  The Republicans are not an almost white organization, nor built of mostly millionaires/billionaires who do not work.

Look back at Dean's quote. He said "many" republicans have never made an honest living in their lives. That is a true statement (the same could also be said for many Democrats). He didn't say "all" or "most", he said many.

As for being an almost all white organizaton, isn't this pretty much true?

While you may not like the way Dean presents himself, can we at least agree that what he is saying is pretty much true?
 

I dunno:

Republican votes in 2004
White - 58%
Black - 11%
Hispanic - 43%
Asian - 41%

Democratic votes in 2004
White - 41%
Black - 88%
Hispanic - 56%
Asian - 58%

Now, I'm trying to find the actual numerical figures, but if we use this basis alone, if the Republican is an almost white organization, is the Democrat an almost black organization?  Percentage wise, no, that would be idiotic.  Now, actual number wise is a different story.  I'm trying to find the numeric demographics from 2004, but by looking at the percentages alone, the Republicans will have less than 50% white voter turnout.