This… is kind of important.
The Democratic National Committee’s current debts outweigh the amount of cash it has on hand by more than $1.2 million, according to the group’s Wednesday filing with the Federal Election Committee.
The filing revealed that the DNC currently owes $6.7 million in debts and obligations that it cannot cover with the $5.5 million worth of cash it has on hand.
Continue reading DNC is now deep, deep, DEEP in debt.
But that’s because I don’t like to blame people for falling for a lie:
…while some people say these 18-year-old kids don’t know what they’re getting themselves into, let’s not pretend we don’t know better. I distinctly remember asking my friend how he would pay off the roughly $70,000 debt he would incur to obtain a major in Ancient Greek and Latin at a liberal arts college in the Midwest. His answer? A simple shrug and flippant “It’s not something I have to worry about right now — hopefully they’ll be forgiven by the government.” Now that he’s still waiting tables four years after graduation, I’d say it’s well past time to start worrying.
Bolding mine: contra the article (which is otherwise fine, if a touch schadenfreude-y) there’s a reason why college students perennially think that their insane student loan debts are going to be forgiven. It’s because the Democrats campaign on the subject. Note: ‘campaign.’ They don’t ever actually do anything about it, because any meaningful way of doing so* would tick off the universities, which are frankly more reliable long-term allies of the Democrats and thus highly valuable to that party. Your average 18 year old college freshman, on the other hand? Well, there’s an excellent chance that within ten years he or she will be voting Republican; the ROI on helping out that class of person is thus downright awful. But Democrats can’t just come out and say that, because in the short term the Democrats need the votes. So… the dance goes on. Continue reading I *do* feel bad for people with horribly crushing student loan debt.
I knew that I was forgetting something:
The Democratic National Committee remains so deeply in the hole from spending in the last election that it is struggling to pay its own vendors.
It is a highly unusual state of affairs for a national party — especially one that can deploy the President as its fundraiser-in-chief — and it speaks to the quiet but serious organizational problems the party has yet to address since the last election, obscured in part by the much messier spectacle of GOP infighting.
The Democrats’ numbers speak for themselves: Through August, 10 months after helping President Obama secure a second term, the DNC owed its various creditors a total of $18.1 million, compared to the $12.5 million cash cushion the Republican National Committee is holding.
Continue reading #DNC $18.1 million in the hole, one year after the election.
I personally think that maybe Chris Wallace shouldn’t have done this to Senator Dick Durbin. Executive summary of “this:” Wallace asked Durbin why it was that President Barack Obama in 2013 declared that our $16 trillion debt was “sustainable,” when Candidate Barack Obama in 2008 declared that $9 trillion debt was “unpatriotic;” and Durbin answered the question by declaring to Wallace that Durbin had had a dry night and did not need to go potty.
Note that I am trying to give the semantic gist of the conversation, here: as Doug Power notes, Durbin didn’t even try to answer the question. Continue reading Chris Wallace smacks Dick Durbin over Barack Obama’s debt rhetoric hypocrisy.
Interesting. Below are the latest (just before the election) Debt and CoH (Cash on Hand) totals for the various committees:
Continue reading A quickie preliminary look at the committees’ debt situation.
Good closing speeches – especially Romney’s – but this is the important thing that you need to take away from it:
Eight billion, five hundred and thirty nine million, five hundred and twenty six thousand, three hundred and thirty three dollars and seven cents. That’s how much debt the country racked up since the convention started.
This. Must. Stop.
Moe Lane (crosspost)
Via James Pethokoukis comes an updated version of the graph (originally created by Obama’s economic advisers Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein) that has been succinctly countering (for years) any and all attempts to argue that the misnamed ‘stimulus’ worked:
For those without access to the picture: it’s a modified version of this graph, which was used to sell the idea that with a stimulus, unemployment would not rise above 8%; and that without a stimulus, unemployment might rise all the way to… 9%!!!!!! That last sentence is what usually gets emphasized in these discussions, and for good reason (it was a nitwit prediction). But I’d [like] to note that according to the original chart we were forecast to be having about 6.5% or so unemployment at this point, with that number dropping rapidly. For that matter, I’d also like to note that neither Romer nor Bernstein are currently employed by the Obama administration; they were more or less booted as quietly as could be managed, once the magnitude of the stimulus disaster was fully grasped by the White House.
Alas, the damage has been done.
Moe Lane (crosspost)