Progressive Democrats in rural red districts are getting funded by lefty Silicon Valley techies

Originally published at:


I get the feeling this might backfire considering how much people are honestly upset about outsiders influencing elections (not just the Russians but folks from neighboring states).


It didn’t seem to affect the elections in Texas too much. I think it was an issue in only one race and that was the DCCC’s campaign against Moser. Moser was backed by the Working Families Party, Our Revolution and the Justice Democrats and Fletcher is being backed by Emily’s List. If anything, the anti-establishment groups seem to be a boon.


So, is Ceglowski funding lefties the same kind of evil as Koch funding righties? Serious question, because it is still outside influence.

1 Like

This is not Ceglowski funding lefties - this Ceglowski organizing people to fund lefties. So the money comes from a lot of different people. The Koch brothers are literally two people with lots of money.

To be against this would be to be against fundraising in general.


I had something I thought I wanted to say but then I changed my mind so instead of deleting it I’m just changing it to this sentence. Apologies.

Really? “Candidate X is being funded by out of touch far-left Silicon Valley elites!!!”

And that’s without even using the foreign and vaguely Jewish sounding name of the organizer.

If you can label it you can rally people against it.

Case in point, you always hear about the Koch brothers, but they’re far from the only people funding the groups they fund. The Koch brothers are significant for influencing how other rich people donate and because they’re the names you can identify with rich white people funding far right Republicans.

We should all be against fundraising in general. Campaigns should be publicly financed with strict limits. A Congress built on fundraising is a corrupt organization. The job of a Congressperson is to respond to constituents, not solicit donations and listen to lobbyists.


The kochs are evil because they use their outsized influence to push sellf-serving pro-oil-industry and antisocial policies. sure, some of that is subjective, but politics is hugely subjective. It’s literally the business of how you want the world to work. It’s totally ok and natural to think that your political opponents are ideologically destructive. It doesn’t always have to be “objective” rule-breaking.

1 Like

Oddly enough, the oft heard conservative narrative (which you’ve summarized) is: tl;dr ‘other people won’t like it if you do what we do’ and it is a bullshit argument constructed from rounding errors and broad brushstrokes (where conservatives think everyone thinks like them and is up to something, like them, and can be blinded to nuance with fear, like them) as usual. And it isn’t true, but it’s a good story. Compelling (especially if you can’t tell if the teller is packing heat).

Why do they keep promising that the river ain’t deep?

in the same way that a window open and all the windows open is ‘ventilation’, sure.

So, naysayers here would be 100% in favor of Candidates for Legislature only being able to raise funds from their home district? Is that the vibe I am getting as how it should be, now that lefties are raising scary amounts of money - suddenly all outside donors are interchangeable no-goodniks?

moose and squirrelery.

This entire affair, and I mean humanity, is a corrupt organization. The best we can do is elect people less corrupt than ourselves.

OMG it’s so terrible, the fucking worst. I loved knocking on doors, introducing myself, and then having said doors slammed in my face. Loved it!

As an aside, people should be nicer to their doors, they’ll last longer that way.

If they’re being funded by Silicon Valley, that seething cauldron of institutional racism and misogyny, they’re not “progressive”

I agree.

Another way to fix things would be a strict per person/company per year cap on political donations, perhaps set to whatever amount one days work at minimum wage would get you. People could still fund things, but billionaires wouldn’t get any more influence than any other person.

Are we really so self-sabotaging that we’ll turn down money to support progressive candidates because “It might make us look elitist?” REALLY?!

Maybe things are still looking swell in your neighborhood but I’ve got news for ya, there are a lot of people hurting and the Democratic party failed them. Now quit wringing your hands over your precious optics AND GET BACK TO FUCKING WORK.


Congratulations on being intellectually flexible enough to change your mind!

Huh. Only if you believe in cultural contagion. I think we pay for candidates who reflect what we believe to be our best aspects, not what might actually be our worst aspects (of which we might only be marginally aware).

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.