Why No One Wants To Give Money To The DCCC— The Dems Are Bleeding Out & They Don’t Even Know It

Milquetoast Candidates, Miserable Results: “Not Republican” Isn’t A Platform 

Neither party establishment is popular. Voters hate them both. But voters hate the Democrats more. Why? Republicans hate Democrats and Democrats hate Republicans but… Republicans are more likely to tell pollsters they’re ok with their own party than Democrats are. Democrats may be just as likely to vote for the lesser evil but they’re certainly not going to tell pollsters they’re satisfied with the pile of crap they’ve watched their party turn into.

And they’re not donating. Contributions are so low right now that the NRCC just outraised the DCCC, $32.3 Million to $29.1 million for the second quarter.

Julia Manchester reported that “In 2025 so far, the NRCC has raised a total of $69 million, while the DCCC has raised $66 million… The NRCC’s second quarter haul is a milestone for the committee, which is normally outraised by its Democratic counterpart.” 

Completely delusional, the DCCC claims to have “the better message, stronger candidates, and necessary resources” to win back the House next year. ‘Republicans are running scared because they know they are poised to be rejected by the American people next year,” said DCCC Chair Suzan DelBene (D-WA). ‘Their support for the Big, Ugly Law is going to cost them the House Majority. It fails to lower costs for everyday Americans and instead rips health care away from millions, threatens funding for rural hospitals, and will lead to higher energy bills– all to pay for tax breaks for the wealthiest few. It’s no surprise that it’s the least popular piece of legislation of the 21st century.’”

Suzan DelBene is a clueless tech multimillionaire with not a glimmer of an idea about what working class voters need. If the Democrats had the “stronger candidates” she claims, they’d be kicking the GOP’s ass in fundraising. Instead the DCCC has been recruiting the regular shit-show of anti-progressive careerists, candidates with nothing whatsoever to offer except the hope that voters might see them as fractionally better than their Republican opponents. Many already proven losers like Rebecca Cooke (WI), Christina Bohannan (IA), Janelle Stelson (PA), Marlene Galán-Woods and Amish Shah (AZ), Jonathan Nez (AZ) and Yadira Caraveo (CO) can only hope the anti-red wave is substantial enough to sweep them into power next year. Basically, the lot of them are worthless and have nothing to offer at all beyond being “not Republicans,”— except for Janelle Stelson, Marlene Galán-Woods and perhaps Amish Shah, who are Republicans pretending to be Democrats for the sake of a nice job in Congress.

But on top of them, the DCCC is recruiting awful new candidates as well to prevent progressives from winning seats, like conservative Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains with whom they hope to beat Randy Villegas in Calfornia’s Central Valley.

Last week, Cal Matters asked if California candidates can replicate Zohran’s success. Ha! Look no further than the Democratic candidates. Not counting Pelosi primary challenger Saikat Chakrabarti, and with the exception of Villegas, whom the DCCC is actively working to sabotage, there are no top progressive candidates in any winnable congressional district. Candidate quality matters.

California progressives who spoke to CalMatters primarily faulted their lack of success on the political influence of corporations, arguing that special interests have spent big to elbow out left-wing Democrats. They pointed to Sacramento’s mayoral race last November, where business-backed Democrat Kevin McCarty defeated his left-leaning opponent Flo Cofer after outspending her two-to-one. Nationwide, progressive members of Congress such as Cori Bush of Missouri and Jamaal Bowman of New York lost to well-funded primary opponents.

The sheer vastness of California also makes it hard to mount effective door-knocking campaigns like Mamdani’s. 

“There’s no doubt that Zohran is a unicorn,” said Jane Kim, head of the Working Families Party in California. “There are unicorns that break out that are able to fly at an altitude that’s very hard for us to reach.”

But progressive strategists and candidates argue that Mamdani’s victory demonstrates a desire for a departure from the establishment. They argue that there is a path to victory if they present themselves as agents of change and craft relatable messages that resonate with the working class, especially on affordability.

“(Mamdani) made the campaign not about progressive vs. moderate. He made it about change vs. the status quo,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, a progressive seeking to unseat Democratic U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco next year.  He is the former chief of staff to progressive U.S. Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“People are sick of the status quo,” he said. “I’m the change candidate.”

…“Even the most progressive or socialist Democrats, if they want to win statewide, they have to reach all those coalition groups in the Democratic electorate, some of which are very progressive and some of which are not,” [USC political science professor Christian] Grose said.

While much of California’s population is renters and aspiring homeowners, its voters are skewed heavily toward older homeowners, who could view things like rent control and social housing as threats to their quality of life, Grose noted. Homeowners account for almost 70% of likely voters, whereas renters account for only 30%, according to a Public Policy Institute of California survey. 

“One path for progressives to win would actually be to change the electorate, to get more renters to turn out, to get more young people to turn out,” Grose said.

That’s what Mamdani sought to do in New York City, and data suggest he succeeded, beating Cuomo in neighborhoods with more young people, many of whom said they liked his affordability policies. As the city pondered rent increases, Mamdani ran on a platform of freezing rent and creating more affordable housing and won 46% of the vote in renter-heavy neighborhoods, Bloomberg reported. 

“Progressives and Democrats and Republicans would all be very foolish not to be courting the youth vote. The problem is that they all do a generally pretty bad job of courting the youth vote,” said Mindy Romero, founder and director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at the University of Southern California. 

Following the November election, California’ss young Democrats expressed frustration that their party isn’t doing enough to resonate with their peers, arguing that candidates should take progressive stances on issues such as the war in Gaza and transgender rights, focus on reaching young people on social media and campuses and simplify their affordability message.

“It can’t be an afterthought,” Romero said. 

Many who spoke to CalMatters hope their firm stance against accepting money from corporate donors will resonate. More than half of California voters “strongly agree” that special interest money has too much sway in state politics, according to a poll released Thursday by the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. 

Though affiliated with the Working Families Party, Randy Villegas, who is challenging GOP U.S. Rep. David Valadao in the swing 22nd Congressional District, hesitates to call himself a progressive. The district is one where only moderate Democrats have managed to come close to victory in the past decade. 

Instead, Villegas said his path to victory lies in his “economic populist,” anti-wealthy message that focuses on making life easier for the working class. Villegas has sworn off corporate political action committee money, a gesture of authenticity that Sannappa said corporate-backed Democrats do not share.

“You are not having to curtail what you say because some donor that gave you $2,700 in Beverly Hills thinks this certain way about this certain thing,” he said.

“We cannot claim to champion the working class … if we are receiving money from the same corporate PACs that Republicans are receiving money from,” Villegas said. 

But Romero said that messaging mostly works with voters who are already aligned with the candidate.

“Not everybody agrees corporate money is bad. They need to be shown exactly what that means for their pocket book, for their family’s well being, or their family’s safety,” Romero said. 

… Progressives in California are hoping that President Donald Trump, who has executed much more sweeping immigration and economic policies than in his first term, drives voters toward “bold,” left-wing candidates. 

“It becomes this populist opportunity to really frame the economy in a way that works for working people and not for the more moderate problem solvers … that tend to be a lot more pro-business,” said Danielle Cendejas, a progressive consultant in Los Angeles. 

But it is not a given that progressives would receive a greater boost than other Democrats, Grose said.

“I think it’s more about someone who can effectively take on Trump,” he said. “The politics is secondary.”

If the DCCC wanted to win seats, they would get behind this

Democratic leaders don’t want to hear it, but the party is bleeding out from self-inflicted wounds. They’ve spent decades trying to triangulate their way to relevance, diluting the winning FDR message, cozying up to donors and systematically crushing the energy and authenticity of the left. Now the bill is coming due. Young voters, working-class voters, disillusioned renters and would-be volunteers see right through the polished consultants and plastic candidates. You can’t buy enthusiasm, and you sure as hell can’t fake conviction. The people know when a party isn’t fighting for them— and they act accordingly. They sit it out. They stay home. Or they start looking elsewhere.

Until the Democrats stop recruiting milquetoast centrists with donor-friendly résumés and start backing real fighters who speak plainly about the corruption rotting our politics and the daily struggle of ordinary Americans, they’ll keep getting outraised and outpaced. The Mamdanis of the world— and you won’t find one hidden on a store shelf— offer a roadmap, but the DCCC would rather crash the car than let the left take the wheel. If the party doesn’t wake up soon, it won’t be Trump or the GOP that buries it— it’ll be its own cowardice, its own complacency and its utter refusal to believe that anything truly transformational is even possible.

Want to contribute to Randy Villegas and Saikat Chakrabarti while staying clear of the DCCC and their Republican-lite candidates? You can do that right here. Can and should; now's when they need the support.