POTUS or Prisoner; The '24 Trump Campaign Fvckery thread
- Thread starter the cac mamba
- Start date
Reality Check
Keepin' it 100
ill_will82
What you see, is what you get
Meatball is finished.
Trump gotta pay 83 million for defaming a woman.
Ghoulini declared bankruptcy but still on hook for $140 million to those sistas he defamed.
Boebart is about finished
Trump will probably be hit with atleast a $370 million judgement courtesy of a black AG.
Must is slowly being exposed as a conman.
Maybe Marty and Doc finally found that Sports Almanac they lost back in 2015.
Trump gotta pay 83 million for defaming a woman.
Ghoulini declared bankruptcy but still on hook for $140 million to those sistas he defamed.
Boebart is about finished
Trump will probably be hit with atleast a $370 million judgement courtesy of a black AG.
Must is slowly being exposed as a conman.
Maybe Marty and Doc finally found that Sports Almanac they lost back in 2015.
these MAGA retards like charlie kirk are gonna have a meltdown if taylor swift "wins" the superbowli hope it happens. and i don't see taylor fukking up her brand with a name endorsement, but i can see a "vote to protect women's rights"
This bytch needs to shut her mouth before she gets turned into a frog.
Murphy’s Law: Democrats Crushing GOP in Fundraising
A 4-1 edge for state Democratic party last year, the biggest ever. And they have Scott Walker and Republicans to thank.
urbanmilwaukee.com
MURPHY’S LAW
Democrats Crushing GOP in Fundraising
A 4-1 edge for state Democratic party last year, the biggest ever. And they have Scott Walker and Republicans to thank.
By Bruce Murphy - Jan 29th, 2024 05:53 pm
Cash. (CC0 Creative Commons).
It was back in 2015 that Republican legislators pushed a campaign finance bill that Democrats opposed and then-Governor Scott Walker signed. Among the provisions was one ending the $10,000 limit for individual donations to a political party. While there were still limits on how much you could donate to candidates, donors now could simply give any amount — the sky’s the limit — to a political party and the party could give it to candidates.
“It’s unlimited! This is madness!” said then-state Sen. Janet Bewley (D-Ashland), objecting to the provision.
Besides opening the floodgates to unlimited donations, complained good government advocates like Jay Heck of Common Cause in Wisconsin, it will turn legislators into sheep who must follow the party leaders in order to get campaign donations. “The legislative leaders will be able to discourage independent stands or even thoughts by individual legislators,” Heck warned.
But Republicans were convinced the change would give them a big advantage in campaigns, and for a while it did. By 2018, three years after the law was passed the state Republican Party raised $17 million, compared to $8 million by the Wisconsin Democratic Party as the Badger Project reported, based on data from the nonpartisan Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC). But by 2020 the numbers were nearly reversed, with the Democratic Party raising $27 million compared to $16 million for Republicans and in 2022, Democrats won again by about $22 million to $16 million.
But that was only a warmup for 2023: Last year the Democratic Party buried the Republican Party, as a recent report by the WDC found. Campaign finance reports for the last half of 2023 showed the Democratic Party raised $16.14 million for the entire year, compared to just $3.95 million raised by the state Republican Party. That’s a more than 4-to-1 edge for the Democrats, including contributions to the state parties from individuals, political action committees, candidate committees and corporations.
The total money raised by the two parties, just over $20 million, was about 10 times more than the two parties combined raised in 2014, about $2 million. This was one year before the $10,000 limit for a donation was ended. But the best example of how wide the floodgates had been opened to wealthy donors is the top contribution to the state Democratic Party last year: California billionaire Reid Hoffman, Microsoft board member and co-founder of LinkedIn, gave the party $3,580,000, or 3,580 times more money that he could have under the state’s old limit of $10,000.
Get a daily rundown of the Milwaukee stories
Both parties had contributions from such billionaires last year. For the Republicans that included Diane Hendricks, owner of ABC Supply, who contributed $945,000 and Elizabeth Uihlein who donated $500,000. Elizabeth and her husband dikk own the Uline company and have been huge Republican donors over the years.
But the Democrats raked in far more donations in 2023 from fat cats who were past donors. Ranking second after Hoffman was Illinois billionaire J.B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, who donated $1,100,000; New York billionaire, philanthropist and frequent right-wing punching bag George Soros, who contributed $1,000,000; Oklahoma billionaires Lynn and Stacy Schusterman, founders of the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies, who both donated $500,000; and mere millionaires Kenneth James Duda of California, founder of Arista Networks, who gave $290,000; and Milwaukee philanthropist Lynde Uihlein, probably the least wealthy on this list, who gave $450,000. All seven on this list were also top donors to the state Democratic Party in 2022, while Lynde Uihlein has been a big donor to the party for decades.
And let’s not leave out Hollywood film director Steven Spielberg and his wife Kate Capshaw, best known for her starring role in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, which her husband directed. They gave $150,000 each to the state Democratic Party last year, after having jointly contributed some $200,000 in 2022 to the state party and various Democratic candidates.
You can expect this rise in donations to parties in Wisconsin to continue climbing, so long as the law allows unlimited donations.
But how is that Democrats are doing so much better getting such donations? Looking at the far bigger list of billionaire donors to Wisconsin’s Democratic Party, you might think the wealthy in American lean to the left. In fact, data shows the nation’s billionaires are more likely to back Republican and conservative political candidates, by a three-to-two ratio in 2022. Certainly Walker and Republicans assumed they would get the lion’s share of fat cat donations, which is why they passed the 2015 law allowing unlimited donations.
What explains the Democrats’ huge edge? Republican Party Chairman Brian Schimming has called state Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler a “master” at raising cash from out-of-state donors, as Urban Milwaukee has reported. But he’s also vowed to catch up.
A more important factor may be that many wealthy Republicans prefer the anonymity of donating to secretive dark money groups, or may not trust the party structure and prefer to run their own third party advocacy group where they control the spending. We saw that in the state Supreme Court race where the campaign of liberal Janet Protasiewicz buried the campaign of conservative Dan Kelly in spending on TV ads, by about $9 million to almost nothing. All the spending for Kelly was done by third party groups: the super PAC Fair Courts America, backed by dikk Uihlein, spent $2.3 million on TV ads and $450,000 on radio advertising, and the state’s biggest business lobby, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, spent $3.4 million on Kelly.
But that money had far less impact per dollar spent because a candidate’s campaign pays far less for TV ads than third-party groups, which are typically charged three times more. So that’s another advantage for Democrats.
Of course the campaign spending arms race never ends and can always change from year to year. But eight years after Walker and Republicans passed their campaign finance law, the results point to an old maxim they might have heeded: be careful what you wish for.
If you think stories like this are important, become a member of Urban Milwaukee and help support real, independent journalism. Plus you get some cool added benefits.
MSN
www.msn.com
GOP’s Salazar says she can’t recall how she voted on CHIPS, appropriations bills
Story by Sarah Fortinsky • 13h
GOP’s Salazar says she can’t recall how she voted on CHIPS, appropriations bills© Provided by The Hill
R
ep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) said Sunday she could not recall how she voted on two key pieces of legislation that she has since touted as victories that she brought home for her district.
In an interview on CBS News Miami, Salazar dodged repeatedly when asked about her votes against certain legislation, including the CHIPS and Science Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023.
Throughout the interview, Salazar said she did not remember how she voted, said she needed to consult her staff, and tried to redirect the conversation to focus on other bills she introduced.
“The money that you talk about — the $40 million that you bring back to the district — sometimes that money comes from bills that you voted against. You voted against the CHIPS Act and yet you praise the fact that the south Florida climate resilience tech hub is going to be started in Miami, right? You voted against the infrastructure bill and you talk about all the money that comes back to the airport,” the anchor said.
“So, at the same time that you’re taking credit for the money that you bring back to the district in Washington, you’re voting against these projects on party line votes,” he added.
Salazar responded, “Listen I, that was, I think, last cycle, I cannot really remember right now, but just look, just look at the Americas Act—”
“You don’t want to explain why you voted against [these bills]?” the anchor asked, cutting her off.
“I mean right now, and I’m not trying to be a politician, there’s so many bills that I’ve introduced and I know that many of them—”
The anchor cut in: “These are bills that you voted against.”
“I understand and, but, the, it’s OK. Sometimes I vote, and sometimes I don’t, but let’s look at the positive,” she said, before pivoting.
The contentious exchange came after the local anchor pressed the former TV journalist about her votes, specifically raising a recent photo-op at Florida International University (FIU) in Miami last month, when Salazar signed a check to the school.
“Last month you were at FIU, and you presented a check for $650,000 to help small businesses at FIU, but you voted against the bill that gave the money that you then signed a check for and handed and had a photo op, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, right? You voted against that bill,” the anchor said.
Salazar replied, “Right now, you have to give me more details, but I do know that every time I have an opportunity to bring money to my constituents, I do so.”
“But you voted against, you voted against the CHIPS and Science Act, right?” he asked again.
“Listen, right now I need to, I need to ask my staff,” Salazar said, before adding the “$40 million that I have brought to this community. Aren’t you proud of me? Aren’t you proud of the $40 million that I brought? Aren’t you proud that I wrote the Dignity Act, haven’t I … let’s talk about the Americas Act,” she said.
The Hill has reached out to officials from Salazar’s office for comment.
lotta potential for Ruin in these primaries
if Donald Trump actually costs Ted Cruz his reelection in 2024, i can die happy the next day
this fukking show 
Sad!
PAC=GoFundMe 
makes me wonder how many Rudy G Shower Steppers he'd have to sell to be back up