Lindy Li, a former Democratic fundraiser who recently changed her party affiliation, has expressed serious concerns over the Democratic Party’s handling of fundraising and its overall direction, particularly with President Joe Biden’s declining prospects in the 2024 election. She feels the party has misallocated funds, misdirected donors, and favored those who shielded Biden from scrutiny.
Recalling her experiences, Li noted, “It was: ‘maintain this very obvious lie in return for access,'” referring to claims regarding Biden’s cognitive abilities. She observed that those who were the most insistent on these claims gained more access, while anyone challenging it found their connections diminishing.
Li herself faced a complete cut-off from access after she raised questions about Biden’s ability to serve another term. Before her departure, she played a key role and is now sharing insights from the campaign leading to Biden’s withdrawal in her upcoming book, “Unburdened,” detailing specific expenditures, such as what happened with a billion-dollar war chest managed by Vice President Kamala Harris.
Interestingly, Li mentions that the financial figures surrounding fundraising weren’t entirely accurate. She described the system as, perhaps a bit harshly, “a pyramid scheme,” where fundraisers sometimes claimed credit for each other’s work and even manipulated the figures to inflate their own success.
“When you recruit someone, you can take up to $250,000 of what they raise,” she explained, revealing how some people might appear to have raised significant amounts while actually doing little. “It’s more about accounting tricks than real funds,” she claimed, indicating that this practice led to inaccurate representations of financial success within the party.
Having been closely involved in fundraising for both Biden and Harris, Li observed many questionable spending practices, noting that significant portions of Harris’s campaign funds went to just a few media contracting firms, which took substantial fees that cumulatively exceeded half a billion dollars. She pointed to contractors like Media Buying & Analytics and Gambit Strategies as central players in this concerning narrative.
Li’s frustration continued as she emphasized the overwhelming percentage of campaign spending that went to media ads. “People mention 10% for the big guy, but it seems to me the real grift could be a straight 15% for these media people,” she remarked, citing the large percentages taken from hundreds of millions of dollars allocated for advertising.
Moreover, Li criticized the party’s penchant for extravagant expenditures that didn’t advance its objectives, highlighting instances like costly events in Las Vegas or high-end hotel stays, which contrasted sharply with the necessities in battleground regions like Pennsylvania.
What genuinely surprised Li was the disconcerting lack of discretion the party showed with the raised funds. She recounted that many individuals contributed substantial amounts of their savings, believing they were helping to salvage democracy as touted by Biden during his campaign against Trump. “Some people liquidated their savings, thinking they were saving the country,” she said, underscoring how profoundly impactful the framing of the election had become for many voters.
“Everyone knew, and everyone played along,” Li concluded, reflecting on the troubling realities within the Democratic fundraising landscape.
