Rich Whitney’s Campaign Is “Scraping the bottom of the barrel”

Rich Whitney sent out a strongly-worded (and somewhat frantic?) fundraising plea to supporters earlier this week. Below is an excerpt from the message:

Circumstances force me to be blunt: My campaign is REALLY hurting for money right now. Just when we need to be peaking, so that we can get some radio and cable TV ads and buy yard and window signs, and numerous other essentials, we are instead scraping the bottom of the barrel…

…Thus far, supporters have not followed through on such basic fundraising efforts as expected. I can’t do it all, and you can’t wait for the “campaign” to do it all. The campaign is US, collectively. I need people to step up to the plate and take some initiative.

To keep the carbon footprint down, I can arrange to “appear” at your house party or other gathering by Skype or phone, but I will also come out to your area if we can plan it to coincide with my campaign appearances. But either way, we need people to get these things OFF THE GROUND, ASAP.

The key is to keep this in perspective. As a candidate who hit 10% in the last gubernatorial election, expectations are quite high for the Whitney campaign. In a later interview Whitney points out that he will still likely buy advertising later; instead, it would be the duration and scale of the ad buys that would be in question.

The situation for the Whitney campaign is not looking good. The fundraising letter particularly mentions the threat of Independent candidate Scott Lee Cohen. We reported two days ago that Cohen has begun a massive radio advertising buy in Chicago, and appears to be targeting African American support. Whitney likely understands that much of his support in 2006 is attributed to “protest voting”- that much of the electorate disliked the two major party candidates so much they purposefully “spoiled’ their vote. However, this year both Libertarian Lex Green and Cohen managed to secure places on the ballot, eroding potential independent and conservative protest voter support. (Polls seem to back this up- when alone on the ballot, PPP had Whitney at 11%, but when a Chicago Tribune poll mentioned all three of the minor party/indy candidates mentioned, Whitney plunged to 2%). For those Green Partiers who hoped for a stunning upset on the heels of the 2006 race, it appears that victory is out of the question.

Of course, in 2006 Whitney’s campaign beat the expectations of pollsters. Nevertheless, the candidate has a lot of work to do if he wants to surpass his showing four years ago.

40 thoughts on “Rich Whitney’s Campaign Is “Scraping the bottom of the barrel”

  1. Ross Levin

    Daniel, Whitney was at the same place in the polls last year as he is now, so – although I’m not completely disagreeing with you – a lot could happen from now to election day.

  2. Daniel Surman

    That is true, and I think there is a chance that his numbers will go up. However, victory has to be out of the question in this race with Scott Lee Cohen’s massive self-funding and Lex Green campaigning too. The American electorate has shown it really doesn’t respond well to multiple indy candidates in one race, like in Maine right now or particularly Texas in the 2006 gubernatorial race.

  3. Robert Milnes

    Once again the solution is a PLAS campaign.
    Announcing you are trying a new strategy & believe you can get a close pluralirty win would have dramatic effect on polling & fundraising & volunteers.
    Then subsequent press conference in which the Lib. announces he is withdrawing & supports the Green would also be dramatic.
    But…losers will be losers.

  4. A Different Green Party Conservative

    No thanks to IPR for this awful Green Party story.
    The Green Party’s Independent Political Report should be better than this.
    Michael Bloomberg and Rich Whitney will buy IPR and use it to initiate the Green Party’s takeover of the country. Soon, the Green Party will be well on its way to taking over the world, then the solar system, then the universe.

    Independent Political Report, official Green Party website.
    Michael Bloomberg, Green Party billionaire.
    Rich Whitney, Green Party future manager of Independent Political Report.

  5. Robert Milnes

    I believe there would be a spike in contributions if Whitney announced a PLAS campaign.
    & WHY NOT? All you have to lose is to lose.
    Rich, you are wasting valuable time.
    Will somebody get the message through to him?
    He’s going to lose. He’s going to rack up a campaign debt.
    Call the fricken press conference.

  6. NewFederalist

    Then why do the Greens need the Libertarians? Using you favorte election of 1912 the total progressive vote would have been the sum of Wilson, TR and Debs at a minimum. That would be over 75% of the popular vote. Using your logic there would be no need for PLAS… the progressive vote is overwhelming by itself.

  7. Robert Milnes

    Contact Nolan. The Green in AZ can withdraw & endorse the Lib Nolan.
    Ideally this could be simultaneous with the Lib, Lex Luthor-I mean Green, withdrawing & endorsing you. If not simultaneous then at least related.
    Get on the horn, man. I mean the interweb. You know, that newfangled thing.

  8. Robert Milnes

    My answer is that neither Wilson or TR sufficiently understood what they were dealing with. The fact of the fatally flawed Progressive Party. Roosevelt thought he could win with sheer hubris. Wilson, instead of joining Roosevelt’s new party, outflanked him by default, having the republican party split.
    What really happened is the progressive party lost & TR & Wilson got bogged down with politics as usual in their respective parties.

  9. Robert Milnes

    Wilson, the progressive democrat, winning the nomination, is roughly equivalent to Obama winning the dem nomination. The rest of the party, present day blue dogs/Clintons, have to support the nominee due to party loyalty.
    TR defied that party loyalty; Wilson did not.

  10. Catholic Trotskyist

    TR would have been an Alan Keyes supporter if he was around today. He was a Christian Right, pro-war fascist, not a progressive/libertarian.

  11. Robert Milnes

    CT, you have been listening to losers like Tom K. & paulie mucho stromboli.
    Listen to me & win.
    How could a Christian Right, pro-war fascist win the Nobel Peace Prize for something he DID-negotiate a peace treaty, not for something he represents or might do-Obama-& found The Progressive Party?

  12. Robert Milnes

    Sorry Tom, but facts are facts. You are a loser. The radicals are losers & they could be winners. You failed to sieze Gravel/Ruwart. You are getting kicked to the curb by lamo lino Root.
    BTP failed to nominate me, instead nominating what’s his name where is he?
    Etc. need I go on?

  13. Robert Milnes

    All the radicals had to do was nominate me & instant fusion ticket! Just like Gravel/Ruwart. The opportunity kind of just happened. But was not recognized or siezed upon. Let alone campaigned on-a PLAS campaign. I tried to explain this but forget it. The rads want a pure ticket or no ticket. i.e. lose/lose.

  14. Starchild

    Robert,

    People like you and Wayne Allyn Root never seem to understand that to libertarians who believe in standing for freedom, period, “loser” is not an insult.

    There is nothing shameful about losing because you stood for what was right. But there is something shameful about selling out in order to “win”.

    When I back a winning effort, I want it to *mean something*. Hollow “wins” that sacrifice libertarian principles in order to achieve their false “victories” mean nothing in the long run. Even the ego boost that some people seem to need so badly won’t last, and it may come at the eventual cost of your self-respect.

  15. Robert Milnes

    Starchild, my knee jerk reaction is I do not like being lumped in with Root. However you have a point.
    Whereas Root is endorsing libertarian support to the right-GOP, Tea Party & ultimately counterrevolutionary Ron Paul republicans & CP Constitution party nationalists,
    I, on the other hand endorse libertarian support to the left. & actually make all the difference in winning. & actually secure an agreement with the GP of 50% candidates. & almost immediately getting many of libertarian proposals enacted e.g. decriminalization & actually getting listened to & credibility & full participation in an inclusive progressive movement. I do not think this-inclusivism in order to win, is a sell out.
    Refusing to join because of willful pride or fear or stubborn obstinance however, would be a cop-out.

  16. Well then ...

    Milness,

    You need to stop wasting your spit on IPR and go proove your thesis.

    Run for state Rep in your district. Where do you live? How many candidates in this year’s election. Who is your incumbant? Do you know?

    So go out and run in the next election. Do it. Start right after this election. Use your PLAStastic system, be the only 3rd choice, get the others to endorse you and your mix of ideas, be the fusion candidate and show us you can win. And if you can get elected as State Rep, I will send you a check for $2400 for your subsequent Presidential campaign.

    Until you to that, shut up.

  17. Robert Milnes

    Well then…, I’m already running an Independent campaign for pres in 2012. With the locked in Centennial theme. 100 years after TR failed to win as progressive, I will succeed. Or some variation thereof.
    Sorry. Thanks for the suggestion & offer though.

  18. Well then ...

    Ah, it’s New Jersey then …

    Good then. Robert Milnes, you should run for State Rep in NJ in 2001. Show us how to do it. You can be the great leader if you just show us how.

    And, if you don’t win, even if you get less than 1% of the vote, I won’t call you a “loser.” I’ll congratulate you for trying.

    Go ahead, Bob. 2011. Show us how it’s done.

  19. NewFederalist

    Bob- Running for president is just plain ego driven. You know you have as much chance of winning as the Prohibition nominee. If you really believe in PLAS take other posters’ suggestions and run for a winnable local office. Prove everyone here wrong by winning. I am fairly confident you will have a pretty slick reason why you won’t do it but if you really believe in PLAS it is the right thing to do.

  20. Mobert Rilnes

    PLAS is the past! It is time for SLAP!
    Socialists, Libertarians, Anarchists, Progressives.
    20% + 3% + stark raving mad stats = victory in 1912!
    They’re all losers anyhow, so might as well throw all principles under the bus, right Bob?

    Follow me to the past, it’s the only future we have!

  21. paulie

    TR would have been an Alan Keyes supporter if he was around today. He was a Christian Right, pro-war fascist, not a progressive/libertarian.

    Mostly right, except that he was an economic “progressive,” relatively speaking.

  22. Robert Milnes

    Mostly wrong.
    TR was a product of his times.
    He was a progressive republican.
    He was clearly NOT a theocrat, unlike Ron Paul.
    He was clearly NOT a fascist, progressivism & fascism being polar opposites.
    He was clearly NOT pro-war, at least after the Spanish-American war, as he won the Nobel Peace Prize years after it-having nothing to do with it.
    He MUST have been a left libertarian, as that is the only thing that has both progressive & republican in common.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *