They don't have to spend $50 to acquire a donor, because their campaigns actually matter.

People, we now have what is perhaps the dumbest, whiniest, stupidest complaint to ever emanate from any Democratic campaign. “Democrats say new DNC debate rules are forcing them to distort their 2020 campaigns to get 130k donors,” reports The New York Times. ”Vendors are now quoting $40 and $50 to ‘acquire’ ONE new $1 donor.”

Why is this bad? “For second- or third-tier candidates, they have to choose: They can either spend their money achieving these metrics, or invest in programs on the ground in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina,” said Betsy Hoover, a Democratic digital strategist who served as director of digital organizing for the Obama campaign in 2012. “Very few are going to be able to do both.”

Here’s the thing—if you are complaining about winning small-dollar support for your campaign, you are inherently doing it wrong. If the choice is between winning white rural voters in Iowa or building a national movement, the national movement wins, hands down. If national support winnows down the field, then GOOD. Everyone gets a say. If you are spending $50 to acquire donors, you are a chump.

You know who isn’t spending $50 to acquire a donor? Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren. Kamala Harris. Joe Biden. Beto O’Rourke. Why? Because they’ve done shit to justify running for president.

You know who else isn’t spending $50 to acquire a donor? Pete Buttigieg, because he’s resonated with a key party demographic. And he did it with no money. It can be done.

If you can’t manage that, then you have no business being in the campaign. There is no god-given right to let Iowans make that decision. We live in a new, better world in which all of us have a say, and candidates have to build movements to succeed. So despite all the stupid shit coming from the DNC this year, they got this one right.

And seriously, if you are spending $50 to acquire a donor, then get out now. You are an embarrassment to politics.