Posted on 01/28/2016 11:07:20 AM PST by grania
My point is that an anonymous donor who won't even be identified when that's specifically asked compromises the campaign. Keep in mind this donor is giving THREE TIMES what small donors are giving. You don't think the anonymity and size of donation compromises the campaign?
No, I don’t. Any more than I believe Trump the president will be compromised by all of the money his corporation owes banks.
This happened to me as well. And I have not been solicited by any other group than Cruz campaign. I like Cruz but voting Trump in General.
But the emails,,with their *alarms* or *sad pleas* some from Heidi...were non-stop.
I finally got them to stop.
When I first saw that, I thought it was a spoof. Now it seems that it isn’t.
In all fairness to Ted Cruz, elections are expensive. Does it make any sense to start picking and choosing candidates on who can fund their own campaign. The pigs in Washington show up broke and leave rich. So we should vote for the best thief? IF this isn’t a Cruz bashing thread, what is it??
I donated two hundred to Trump, received a thank you e-mail, and that was it, Cruz on the other hand has been relentless in spaming.
If it’s the actual campaign itself calling (not a PAC) and Bob donates $100 and donor throws in $300 more, are they saying the $400 is donated to the campaign under Bob’s name?
So if 100 people do like Bob, then the anonymous donor has indirectly donated $30,000 to the campaign through other people, sidestepping maximum donation amounts rather that going through a PAC.
Isn’t that illegal?
You children crack me up.
How dare a man act brash in defense of our nation.
Does anybody know how that works? If I were giving to the campaign, I wouldn't want "anonymous"'s donation added to mine. It's an inaccurate reflection of where that money came from. So is what's really happening is anonymous is giving that money to the PAC, but doing it this way to have the campaign enhance its grass roots contributions through this incentive.
For us little folk, it doesn't seem like a real good idea, if we want a candidate to stay independent of special interests.
No kidding. Apparently only billionaires should be able to run.
When they've got billionaires donating millions, then why is my $50 important? It seems like it wouldn't be worth the time to the campaign.
And, it seems to me like a large percentage of that is skimmed off the top by the person/organization doing the fundraising.
Maybe they think you're more likely to be loyal to the candidate if they can get you to put a little skin in the game.
I think it's a racket.
Trump is not sexist. I did research on him after the Megyn question & found out that he is quite the opposite. He promoted women before it was politically correct. He has many women employees that think very highly of him and are in high positions through-out his organization. His comment about “It would be a pretty picture to see the woman on her knees” was a setup segment in the Apprentice show. A playboy model was the apprentice on that particular show. It would be like using one of the roles that Reagan played as representative of what he believes about women.
I think Megyn’s blatant talk about her husband’s sexual organ and her breasts on the Howard Stern show was much more derogatory towards women.
I did as well. I still support Cruz but come on guys I was getting 4 calls a day from either DC or Texas. Two to three mailers a day and 4 e-mails per day.
And stupid and insulting sale tactics like sending me a dollar in the mail or just yesterday a check for $100 bucks to match it and send it back. Then some mysterious benefactor would match it again.
Stop bugging me I am already on your side. There are making it harder for me to feel like giving. Spend the money I send you on outreach not on pestering me for more money.
Very thoughtful responses of yours. Three times matching sounds generous, until, as you noted, it results in the donor having three times the influence you might have, and politics absorbs enough money.
What I get is a never ending cycle of junk mail. “Statement enclosed”. A membership card for the Ted Cruz campaign, ad nauseum.
The e-mails from Heidi finally stopped. Not because I asked to be taken off the list, which I did several times to no avail, but because I reported them as spam and my e-mail provider is now screening them for me.
I never took the phone calls. I got dozens of phone calls from Texas which went straight to voice mail.
What a difference, huh? I get a few e-mails from the DT campaign. Always future appearances or a summary of what’s going on. All very respectful, never alarmist.. And they never, ever beg for money.
That’s nice.
I used to support St Rafael until he was for TPA before he was against it.
I’m now quite convinced that Cruz has all the electability of Barry Goldwater and all the charm of Richard Nixon.
There: I said it.
What if the anonymous donor is foreign...
This is disturbing - “How Facebook tracks and profits from voters in a $10bn US election” - Facebook is following YOU and politically profiling you then uses your email as well as your FB account as a way to follow you from device to device, so that they sell active digital ad feeds from political campaigns who feed their ads to profile blocks, “real-time voter targeting” that reaps huge profits for FB. The worse abuser of this is the Ted Cruz campaign, the method to even follow you smartphone to smartphone and then feed you digital video political ads, popups and active java, is referred to as “organic ways” by FB and others as if this unregulated political solicitation and spending of unregulated donations isn’t “intrusive”, yet it is ironic that you have Cruz who supposidly has stated opposition to government surveillance yet the discrepancy between Cruz’s past opposition to government bulk surveillance and his use of targeted techniques online.
I am convinced a Ted Cruz as President will use these same methods as part of, and exactly for, government surveillance of the American people by his administration.
“Apparently only billionaires should be able to run”...
Over a long career, I worked for, or worked alongside, individuals that either were, or became billionaires. In their defense, they were not evil people.
The principal difference with the super wealthy is that they have transcended the old saw of “time is money.” Money does not dictate how they spend their time. Their common interest is in life extension as most came into their fortunes after age 40.
As for me; I’m off for the Early Bird special and maybe the dollar store on the way home...
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.