- cross-posted to:
- news
- cross-posted to:
- news
You must log in or register to comment.
Democratic Strategists: the ratfucking will continue until moral improves.
Let’s not forget that the DNC poured money into Republican campaigns via Schiff associated super PACs to exclude Porter from Californias open primary system so that Schiff wouldn’t lose in November.
She’d have a chance if she ran as an independent, but if she runs as a D, the Dems consulting industry won’t have her. I’ve worked with Porter before on both fundraising and some campaigns outside of elections and I’m confident she could win. However, if she insists on doing it inside the system…
Links on this Schiff bit? Hadn’t heard that mentioned before.
This gets you started, but it went far far deeper than this article: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/adam-schiffs-brazenly-cynical-campaign-strategy-boosts-a-republican/
These ads were paid with donations to Democratic campaigns after getting run through the DNC money blender.
So if you made act blue donations, you may have paid to ratfuck progressives.
Maybe I’m reading the context of your article wrong, but as far as I can tell, there was no funding of Republican campaigns either directly or indirectly through Schiff. They did some advertising which I think is shady to disregard the other candidates and only frame it between Schiff and Garvey, but I can’t find any evidence or articles directly stating that DNC or Schiff money was funneled into Republican campaigns. Even Porter didn’t make that claim from what I can tell.
Here’s the breakdown of the campaign contributions and spending: https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/adam-schiff/
So what he did was shitty to the other Dems hoping to be on the ticket, and it worked because it edge them out of the race, but there was no direct contributions to the GOP candidate.
The difference between a direct contribution and paying for advertising to boost your campaign are practically nothing. That’s the whole problem with SuperPACs.
Campaign money is there to boost the candidate campaign. Not sure what else you’d expect it to be used for, but I digress.
The original comment was saying he funneled money to the GOP side, and all I’m poinint out is that does not seem to be the case.
And I’m pointing out that it doesn’t matter. Unless you think SuperPACs aren’t funneling money to the campaign they’re supporting.
Schiff is a corrupt POS. Bought and paid for.
Fuck Kamala Harris. Give us Katie Porter.
She’s got my support. I really liked her during the debates.
I’m down for Governor Porter, but I also think DNC’ll just back Harris following their usual bullshit “she earned it” bs. Honestly Porter is definitely more aligned with the standard Californian, especially after Harris moved even farther right trying to appeal to the general US (but let’s be clear, she was still right of Porter even before that).
I kinda doubt that Porter aligns more with the average Californian. Remember, we are the state with the most Republicans which would also mean more moderates. I think Kamala’s less liberal/progressiveness would appeal to conservatives over Porter. On the other hand, there was so much crap slung at Kamala, I could imagine conservatives not wanting her failing to comprehend that she’s better aligned to their ideals than Porter.
Porter’s advantage is her ability to communicate. I think she could easily convince moderates and Republicans to swing her way.
Up against someone like Harris it would be a tough battle. Harris has the money and is already well established both state and country-wide.
True, I’m wondering how many neolibs and moderates would prefer other options. Republicans likely won’t care much about the primary, but those groups do make up a fair amount of California too. Though I don’t even remember who Gavin was up against.
I do remember the Governator, though. Ugh
Got my vote
A Porter adviser told NBC News that if Harris decides to run, Porter would back her.
Fuck no absolutely don’t.
She’ll have my vote. I love her determination.
If only I lived in California!
Nice but zero chance. Healthcare lobbyists and energy lobbyists in CA will spend anything to make sure she loses.
Nah she can do it, because she can win outside of SF and LA.
The liability she has are the unreliable districts in allegedly blue areas within the bay area and LA. She’s no friend of the power within the California Democratic party, but the California branch of the party is deeply unpopular even among California Democrats.
