Posted on 04/12/2015 11:39:45 PM PDT by concernedcitizen76
The U.S. Senate’s most outspoken contrarian, Ted Cruz, became the first official 2016 candidate to launch a bid for the White House Monday. Despite the fact that he’s highly controversial within his own party, it has long been known that Ted Cruz is bankrolled by politically active libertarians who like his brand of politics.
Paypal co-founder, Facebook investor, and self-styled libertarian Peter Thiel gave roughly $10,000 to Ted Cruz’s senate bid back in 2011. However, it’s his indirect contributions that really hit the mark.
Thiel has shelled out an estimated $2M to an arm of the libertarian political action group, Club for Growth. The Club for Growth network, according to the database of watchdog group The Center for Responsive Politics, was Cruz’s largest single donor ($700,000).
It should be no surprise that California is Cruz’s largest donor state outside of his native Texas.
Even within libertarian circles, Cruz is a special case. Many Tea Party favorites, such as Cruz, typically get a large portion of their contributions from an army small donors (<$200). Rand Paul, for instance, raised 43% of his individual contributions from small donors. However, only 16% of Cruz’s total war chest is small donors.
Fully 58 percent ($10M) of his individual contributions are from large check writers, and another $1.6M came from political action committees.
To be sure, it would be misleading to believe that Silicon Valley’s biggest conservative backers are staunch conservatives. They seem more about breaking down traditional government institutions than propping up any one ideology.
For instance, former Facebook employee Chamath Palihapitiya gave a sizable $5,000 to Cruz but also donated to the Democratic upstart Ro Khanna, who tried to overtake long-time Silicon Valley House Representative Mike Honda.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Sorry
I don’t buy it much
Since Cruz raised 31 million dollars in a week, I guess this means that he has plenty of small donors, but that big donors have also just dumped a lot into this huge sum, so the percentages are skewed right now.
It seems that one of the early objections to Cruz was that he would not be able to raise money.
That does not appear to be the case.
Ping
This is a sign that they believe that Cruz is the conservative that is the real deal, with the best chance and the strongest will, to actually do something about this out of control government.
After monitoring Cruz and Rand Paul, who I assume says all the right things and uses the favorable language, they dismissed him, and take Cruz seriously.
“I’m a libertarian, and I’m supporting Ted Cruz”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3278302/posts
Ted Cruz trumps Rand Paul
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3277805/posts
Prepare for an ugly (no pun intended) campaign from Hillary. There is NOTHING she can offer to vote ‘for.’ The ONLY thing she can do is ensure the media is slavishly devoted (which it is), destroy any opposition using any means necessary, and secure the illegal votes (which the democrats control).
I object to the premise of this article. Ted Cruz is not controversial in the party, albeit he is controversial with the elites, who in fact are the ones who are controversial within the party.
Keep in mind that Bill Clinton has not been President for over 14 years. Anyone under 32 was too young to vote when Clinton left office. Besides that, as a group, they don't seem to much care what about the media's Kool-Aid.
...” Bill Clinton has not been President for over 14 years”...
Bill Clinton has never left Washington Politics by any means, he is constantly been in political circles and travels with both Hillary and Chelsea on their speaking circuts when he’s not doing his own.
So Billy is very well known among students and younger voters.
Your Post #11 makes a valid point. To the Millennial generation and even to the Generation X-ers, she is just a tired, old lady. Look for them to go for youth and vision like they did with Obama. But, this time hopefully, they’ve learned that “substance” matters also.
I thought 'pac's weren't allowed to give directly to candidates? Am I wrong?
Clinton left Washington... to go to Epstein’s Orgy Island!!
I want to congratulate you for being the first freeper to be tacky to me this my third primary season here because that freeper is either snarky by nature or prone to miscomprehension or just runs with the inevitable wolf packs
I wrote IM NOT BUYING IT in response to the article posted
Being such a peach like I am ill explain for you
I do not think Cruz will ever ever have California tech dollars flowing his way in any serious way
Cruz like most of us here is a social conservative
Very culture war Christian
Kali tech folks are the opposite
God to them is the environment and the demonization of western culture and the get back those repressed deserve
Cruz is Palin 2.0 to them albeit much more unflappable
I prefer Cruz or Walker but I’ve seen how it shakes out here
Nasty behavior and calls for tots and last go around all for naught
We shall see
I’d give Walker slight odds over Cruz but I prefer Cruz
Beyond those two anyone but Jeb
California science types were once conservative
Modern code writers are not
They own the Internet sadly
Every major internet surf engine or marketplace sans eBay is lib
Wikipedia and so on
Not good Cruz mining
That objection was intended to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Jeb was also supposed to suck up all the big donors before anyone else got in the field.
Timing fail.
I took a glance at this thread earlier and I saw your post. I knew exactly what you meant. The response was uncalled for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.