Stamford Advocate (Sunday)

Warren’s wine bottle pops up in big donor debate

-

WASHINGTON — On a Saturday evening in June 2018, with temperatur­es in the 70s and the Red Sox playing at Fenway Park, supporters of Massachuse­tts Sen. Elizabeth Warren gathered at the City Winery Boston for a fundraiser.

They were treated to songs by the Grammywinn­ing artist Melissa Etheridge and heard remarks from Warren, who was months away from announcing her campaign for the 2020 Democratic presidenti­al nomination. For the top donors, those who could contribute or raise $5,400 per couple or $2,700 a person, there was a VIP photo reception and premium seating.

For them and others who gave at least $1,000, there was also a gift: a souvenir wine bottle.

In Thursday night’s Democratic presidenti­al debate in Los Angeles, Warren lit into rival Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, for attending a fundraiser at a “wine cave” in California’s Napa Valley where he dined and sipped under a chandelier with Swarovski crystals and where a novelty large bottle of wine can cost $900.

“Billionair­es in wine caves should not pick the next president of the United States,” Warren said. Later, she added, “I do not sell access to my time.”

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders joined in, attacking Buttigieg for consorting with millionair­es and billionair­es. Even Andrew Yang, the entreprene­ur who rarely criticizes his fellow candidates, added to the chorus when he ridiculed the idea of politician­s who “go shake the money tree in the wine cave.” Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar tried to make light of it all when she said that while she had never been to a wine cave, she had visited “the wind cave in South Dakota.”

The term (hash)Winecave trended on Twitter.

As a White House contender, Warren has made a conversion to spurn bigdollar donor events like the one in Boston. It’s an effort to burnish her appeal as a can’tbebought candidate with deep grassroots support, a point of pride she used to bludgeon Buttigieg.

But some see her transition from a prolific force on the donor circuit to a presidenti­al hopeful who has tried to curb others from doing much the same as less than noble.

“Challenge Pete on everything from his age and experience to his record in South Bend,“said Rufus Gifford, former finance director for President Barack Obama’s campaign. “I think that’s totally fair. But this is just disingenuo­us. It implies a level of corruption and cronyism that is inaccurate and ultimately plays into the hands of Republican­s.”

Warren and Sanders have made scorning the big money part of a broader campaign to rid what they say is its corrupting influence in politics.

For Sanders, that’s largely been his practice for decades. For Warren, as the Boston event shows, it’s come more recently. She used more than $10 million from her Senate campaign account, some of it raised at large donor events, to help seed her presidenti­al bid, a fact Buttigieg eagerly pointed out.

Past Warren donors say she was an engaging presence at those events, asking questions of her wealthy patrons and listening intently to what they had to say.

She also made it personal. She bestowed awards on those who were successful at tapping their personal networks to raise money for her. Those who bundled large amounts under $50,000 for her Senate campaign earned a silver pin, while those who brought in more were awarded a gold one engraved with her signature. Her campaign says it’s a practice she discontinu­ed in 2012.

As Warren considered a White House run, she held a series of small meetings at her home to court top Bostonarea donors who raised large sums for Hillary Clinton and to gauge their interest in supporting the senator’s potential bid, according to a past contributo­r who attended one of the meetings. The donor spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private matters.

“When we made the decision to run the campaign this way, the players in the usual moneyforin­fluence game dismissed it as naive,“Warren spokesman Chris Hayden said in a statement. “We’re pleased that our 1”00% grassroots strategy has been so effective that they’re now threatened enough to be attacking us for it.”

 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States