Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Kirsten Gillibrand Campaign Struggling to Raise Cash Due to Backlash Over Franken Resignation

Kirsten Gillibrand Campaign Struggling to Raise Cash Due to Backlash Over Franken Resignation

“no question that the first quarter was adversely impacted by certain establishment donors”

As far back as November, people have predicted that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-NY) role in the resignation of former Senator Al Franken would hurt her prospects for 2020. It looks like it’s coming true.

Gillibrand’s campaign continues to struggle to raise money, and even they acknowledge their Franken problem.

Michael Burke reports at The Hill:

Gillibrand campaign links low fundraising to Al Franken backlash: memo

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-N.Y.) presidential campaign suggested Sunday that the campaign’s low first-quarter fundraising totals could be partly attributed to backlash over Gillibrand’s decision in 2017 to call for the resignation of Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.).

In a memo obtained by The New York Times, the campaign reportedly said there’s “no question” that donors are retaliating in response to Gillibrand calling on Franken, who had been accused of sexual harassment, to step aside.

“There’s no question that the first quarter was adversely impacted by certain establishment donors — and many online — who continue to punish Kirsten for standing up for her values and for women,” the memo reads.

Gillibrand’s campaign announced Sunday that it raised $3 million in the first quarter of 2019, putting her behind several of her Democratic rivals in the race, including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

Gillibrand has other problems as well. In October, just before the 2018 midterms, she told New York voters that if she was elected to the Senate, she wouldn’t run for president. As soon as she won the election, she broke her promise.

Now, due to her fundraising woes, she has shifted funds from her Senate campaign to her presidential campaign.

Elena Schneider reports at Politico:

Gillibrand raises $3 million in first quarter

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has raised $3 million since launching her presidential bid, her campaign said Sunday, a sum that puts the New York Democrat near the bottom of Democrats’ fundraising leaderboard after the year’s first quarter.

But Gillibrand still has a hefty sum in her campaign account — over $10 million, more than a number of her opponents — thanks to a big transfer of leftover funds from her 2018 Senate reelection campaign. Gillibrand’s spokeswoman didn’t disclose the number of donors who contributed to her bid, as some other campaigns in the grassroots-obsessed Democratic primary have so far.

Gillibrand’s recent town hall event on CNN was also a dud.

Mediaite reported:

Kirsten Gillibrand’s CNN Town Hall Pulls in Rock Bottom Ratings

CNN has hosted a series of 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidates for town halls. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, California Sen. Kamala Harris, New Jersey Senator Corey Booker, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar have all participated.

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand was up to bat Wednesday night, but her appearance wasn’t met with encouraging ratings. Regardless of what you make of Gillibrand’s polling, few viewers tuned in to watch her talk about the issues.

Gillibrand’s town hall bagged a paltry 491,000 in total viewers and 115,000 in the advertiser coveted A25-54 demographic.

For some context: in the first quarter of 2019, CNN’s 10 p.m. host Don Lemon doubled those numbers: on average, he bagged 1.16 million total viewers and 361,000 in the demo.

In such a crowded field, fundraising would be a challenge for any candidate. In Gillibrand’s case, it will be significantly more difficult if many Democratic donors are intentionally withholding cash as a form of punishment.

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Is it possible that some people remember Gillibrand’s support of Mattress Girl (Emma Sulkowicz)? The bad judgement involved in that ALONE disqualifies the Blond-Bobbed menace for the presidency.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | April 17, 2019 at 3:31 pm

Gillibrand deserves Franken.

They’re both totally NASTY as a server in Hilary’s bathroom!

Her support of limiting “tactile” nuclear weapons hasn’t resonated with her base.

She blames the Franken situation. But c’mon – what interest has their ever been in a Gillibrand presidency?

Her campaign has the bright glow of a 1-watt fluorescent bulb.

Gillibrand is lucky to hold the seat she does. Stay in your lane, lady.

    oldgoat36 in reply to Merlin. | April 17, 2019 at 8:01 pm

    She is not unlike the glass of water with the D next to her name that Pelosi claims AOC is. She is elected by NYC who for all the claims of sophistication cannot see beyond the party membership to the views and policies she pushes. Schumer is the same thing. Neither inspire. It’s too bad they will never reach their expiration date so long as they stay in NY politics.

    This state is so messed up.

There’s no question that the first quarter was adversely impacted by certain establishment donors

I’d say there a great deal of question. She’s perhaps the most nothing of a field full of bland nebbish candidates. There is no chance that she’ll ever be president, even if all the other candidates die. And she’s not going to rake in the bucks from donors interested in a cause, because she isn’t championing one. What do liberal donors want? Some want a president who will fight to destroy the 2nd Amendment. They have better candidates to donate to. Some want one who will try to cripple the 1st Amendment. Ditto—there are more likely candidates. The sexists (“it’s time for a woman president!”), the race-baiters, the communists—none will be interested in this twit. After the disastrously expensive Hillary! failure, donors are probably looking for a better return on investment. None of this has anything to do with Franken.

She has a terrible, itty-bitty little girl voice. Why someone hasn’t advised her to take elocution lessons is beyond me.

Quite possible that the big donors shied away because they got a phone call from a Chappaqua prefix because she dissed The Rapist

Who knew Al Franken was so beloved.

Do the democrats have anyone who would not be a liability on the
VP ticket?