"An existential threat": the desperate campaign to advance the debate

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand kicked a ping-pong into a cup of water – a version of the drinking game, from pong to beer – and turned the moment into a digital ad asking for donations of $ 1 to his presidential campaign. Washington Governor Jay Inslee is peddling stickers for dollar donations and has used his recent CNN City Hall to launch a television call for more contributions to the campaign. Former representative John Delaney promised to donate $ 2 of his own money to a charity for each of the next 100,000 donors who contributed to his campaign.

The unconventional, often fanciful, fund-raising arms race is part of a desperate struggle to break a new threshold set by the Democratic National Committee, 65,000 donors, at the first primary debates held in June and July. The televised debates could be a decisive showcase for the presidential candidates of the 2020 presidential election. This requirement has redefined the strategy of the candidates who have difficulty to exceed the threshold of the donors, by modifying the priorities of expenditure and by modifying the Orientation of their campaigns.

History continues below

This is the importance of the debates that some presidential campaigns have decided to give priority to advertising on Facebook rather than hiring staff in the first states, said several collaborators of the campaign. Others pointed out that the rules gave priority to looking for viral moments at the start of the campaign rather than creating a traditional voting infrastructure in Iowa and the US. New Hampshire. But supporters of the new rules say they have just forced their campaigns to prove that they can compete in the 21st century before the election year.

"The days of fair financing [a campaign] in Iowa and New Hampshire have disappeared, especially in a group of 22 people, "said Howard Dean, former president of DNC, whose 2004 presidential campaign had been a pioneer in online fundraising on a budget. "I would say to candidates who have not exceeded this threshold to go to work."

John Davis, a senior advisor for Delaney's long-term campaign, said that when the requirements of the DNC were published, "we have adjusted our plan".

"You start with the goal of winning Iowa, New Hampshire, but now we have to do it first," Davis continued. "We always planned to invest in a small value program, but we did not have a schedule."

"This will get candidates to focus on fundraising rather than hiring staff and traveling to major primary states," said former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. candidate for the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2008 and calling the DNC rules "disturbing". "This clearly benefits candidates who announced early or those who already had a fundraising base."

Candidates may also qualify for the debate by obtaining at least 1% of the three approved ballots. But the campaigns also aim to reach the donor threshold, as the DNC has limited the number of participants in the debate to 20. If more applicants meet the survey or donor criteria criteria, the committee will prioritize presidential candidates who met both. Moreover, it is to be feared that the DNC will continue to strengthen the criteria for future debates, which have not yet been announced.

Six candidates – Gillibrand, Delaney, Inslee, former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper and representatives Tim Ryan and Eric Swalwell – met the criteria for qualifying the debate through their polls, but not their donors. Senators Cory Booker and Julian Castro both won 65,000 donors over the last few days, a victory personally celebrated by Booker personally by FaceTiming with its 65,000th donor, a Minnesota gun reform activist.

"We are holding back in strategic decision-making because it is now necessary to determine the thresholds [to qualify for] debates three and four, "said an assistant to the presidential campaign who granted anonymity to discuss the internal campaign strategy. "These rules encourage companies to become viral and become national rather than building an infrastructure in the states that can actually win a caucus."

Another contributor to the presidential campaign described the requirement as "existential threat", not least because the DNC was likely to meet these requirements and strengthen them to participate in future 2019 debates. "Go up to 90,000 or 120,000". I said. "That's why it's so important to reach 65,000 people, even for those of us who have reached the polls."

And several presidential campaigns question the long-term impact of the rules, especially if they are optimized for future debates, could harm relations with small donors who are not yet ready to commit to a candidate .

"These demands on modest donors are stressful and I'm not sure this is the right way to engage with constituents," said Jennifer Fiore, senior advisor to the Castro campaign. "In the end, donors control the representation of the candidate's ideas or the representation of the community. If we do it for next year, it will be very stressful for voters and campaigns. "

From the outside, there is less sympathy for these positions.

"Social media and grassroots support have become a standard of judgment for modern candidates – they may not like it, but it's the new reality," said Patti Solis Doyle, Democratic strategist who led the 2008 presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. "The game has changed and you will be working in the new system where you have to go out."

But there is also a clear intention to avoid "[repeating] What happened to the Republicans in 2016, "said Tom McMahon, executive director of the DNC in the 2008 presidential cycle," when Trump dominated everything, "said Tom McMahon, the two-tier system that included debates" university "and" junior university ".

"So how do you create a fair test?" McMahon added. "It's not easy."

"The DNC has put in place a popular fundraising threshold to ensure candidates in this historically vast field a fair opportunity to reach the stage of debate, and because it reflects a vital work for the success of the general election campaign, "said Adrienne Watson, spokesperson for the DNC, said in a statement provided to POLITICO.

The rules have also opened the process to unconventional candidates, at least to those who can ignite online. Andrew Yang, a businessman who operates on the basis of a universal basic income and has weighed against circumcision, has already met both criteria for the debate phase.

For candidates, the best strategy seems to be the explicit request. Pete Buttigieg, mayor of South Bend, who cut a video on Twitter shortly after his speech at CNN, asked supporters to "participate in whatever they want" to "place him on the stage of debate." more than $ 600,000 in the next 24 hours. Since then, Buttigieg has promised supporters that it "would respect your inbox" and would not send fundraising emails "asking for $ 3 by midnight, otherwise hell will break loose", has he said Sunday night at a campaign stage in South Carolina.

Other candidates who have failed to take advantage of this unique viral moment continue to advocate for $ 1 support. Booker has gone to Twitter to ask for 2,000 additional contributions this week, before reaching his goal of 65,000 donors. Representative Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii sent an e-mail with the subject: "We risk losing our place", although she is doubly qualified for the stage.

Even former Vice President Joe Biden, who heads the primaries and has overtaken the 65,000 donors on his first day in the race, continues to make modest demands.

"Can you send $ 1?" The Biden campaign wrote in a recent fundraising email.