No actually I was highlighting the fact that B-Bob's post, while clearly absurd, actually reflects what Obama has done.
Wow, you just can't not take the bait. It is childishly easy to get you to type "Obama," and soon you will have the same sad response, finding yourself thinking and typing Hillary, in all your waking moments. It's already begun, hasn't it?
Serious question: When the Republican nominee wins the election, will you get all huffy and retreat to your purse-dog forums, or will you hang around the D&D?
Ted Cruz has a four strong Super PACs that have been standing by, keeping their powder dry before spending money on expensive TV and radio ads. His critics and even some of his supporters have been critical, saying they were making a big mistake by not spending money all along the way. Once again, the discipline and self control of Cruz and his unaffiliated Super PAC network have served him well. And now when these ads really do have a chance to make the most impact, these Super PACs have the resources and the information to target those expenditures in the most effective way.
Interesting guys, though of course your responses are blocked from my Clutchfans enjoyment, and I'm not clicking them this morning. It's still cute to see the responses right next to each other. Spoiler Whatever you do, never forget: you can affect the entire 2016 presidential race from you keyboard, just by typing messages on a basketball fan site. Happy holidays!
I really would like to know what this move is going to look like, so I know what to watch out for. Something like the Electric Slide? Does it have a swirl at the end ala Costanza? Hammer dance? This is important information.
Great news for America. I am very pleased that 3 unelectable candidates are trouncing Rubio and Bush.
Lol, 'unaffiliated.' All 4 of the Super PACs follow the same strategy as Cruz, but don't coordinate. I'm not blaming Cruz, or at least not only Cruz. But this PAC campaign financing thing is such a scam. With the possible exceptions of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders (do they have PACs?), all our politicians are engaged in corruption by flouting this non-coordination rule. I know the rules are a stupid, unsustainable mess right now, but its ridiculous for them to walk around campaign like honest actors when it looks like they're breaking the law. And no one cares.
Because the law is dumb, and hard to enforce. God forbid human beings coordinate, what a crime that would be.
Interesting - so now you believe the rule of law should only apply when convenient to you. Quite the 180 from your past positions. Do you believe dumb, hard to enforce laws should be just ignored by the people in general? Or just when it comes to Ted Cruz?
It is dumb and unenforceable. I suppose the problem comes from trying to build a whole framework for regulating campaigning, and then blowing out a massive hole in the center with Citizens United. Congress should probably remove the wreckage, since they obviously can't fix it. In the mean time, should politicians obey the law when the law is stupid and unenforceable? Of course they should.
I think PACs can talk to each other, can't they? It's just the politician who can't coordinate. I'm sure Kellyanne is a smart person and can divine the political strategy that would best serve her bff. But politicians should avoid impropriety and the perception of impropriety. Maybe Cruz and even all the politicians are diligently following all the rules. But, it sure doesn't look like that. That's fertile ground for actual corruption and produces many of the same deleterious effects as corruption. I know Cruz didn't create the problem (though as a Senator, I don't think he's done much to fix it either).
I think it all comes down to what "coordinate" means. If a candidate were to have periodic meetings with their Super PACs, reviewing voter data, polls, other planned campaign expenditures, etc., I would expect that would be against the law and I would hope the FEC would pursue that as a violation, regardless of who the candidate is. If a candidate were to make their opinions known on this topic to a friend of theirs, perhaps before the Super Pacs are formed, who later becomes the director of the candidate's Super Pacs, then you would be able to communicate a lot of this sort of high level, strategic information without there being anything to coordinate with. For example, the candidate's might communicate that early ad buys by Super Pacs are great for the financial well-being for the political advisers and crew that produce these ads, but are a waste of money for the candidate's election effort, and that certain specific sorts of targeted advertising purchased and placed in the very last few weeks before the election, expensive though they may be, are the way to go. I expect this sort of thing goes on between all the campaigns and their Super PACs prior to formation and is not considered to be coordination and would not be regarded as against the law by the FEC or anyone else.
What if a megadonor who owns a voter research company donates the majority of the money to the SuperPACS, and then the SuperPACs and the Campaign both contract out the megadonor's company to develop a voter database for them? http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/ted-cruz-donor-for-data-119813
All laws, including dumb laws, should be complied with. In this case, that just means using a public go-between to drop hints. It's all quite silly. Way it is now, the campaign has deniability. They'd be more accountable if they controlled the dollars.
setting aside the legality, why would Cruz and Conway coordinating be a problem? I.e. what's the purpose of the law?
