Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   "Victory, you say? Master Rove, not victory. The shroud of the Dark Side has fallen. Begun, the internecine Republican SuperPAC Wars have"   ( divider line
    More: Obvious, Karl Rove, Republicans, GOP, Restore Our Future, Congressional Leadership Fund, American Crossroads, Gabriel Gomez, Senate Conservatives Fund  
•       •       •

3157 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Nov 2013 at 3:26 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-11-09 03:39:26 PM  
4 votes:
The idea of spending "unlimited cash" to elect people to cut spending makes my brain hurt.
2013-11-09 04:37:23 PM  
3 votes:
So... in the battle of the Super PACs the Dems have a couple of umbrella groups who look after all the Dem House races with very little in-fighting, lowered overhead and skim off by lawyers and the like.

Meanwhile over on the GOP side you've got internecine warfare between a whole bunch of little groups (some of whom have only one donor but are named "Americans for...") some advocating for ideological purity and some for electability. Teatards and old school GOP fighting it out for the brand name of RepublicanTM.

Kinda like watching two junkies fighting over a plastic spoon.
2013-11-09 09:20:08 AM  
3 votes:
Invest in political t-shirt, bumper sticker, and sign producers. Complete lack of grammar/spelling a plus.

They are going to burn down an entire pile of money fighting each other.
2013-11-09 10:03:53 PM  
2 votes:
FTFA: Super PACs - unlike congressional campaigns - are permitted to raise and spend unlimited funds. The downside, however, is that the campaign and the PAC are forbidden from coordinating. The Federal Election Commission requires a strict firewall between a campaign and a super PAC - meaning that a trusted aide usually needs to helm the outside effort.

In my opinion this rule against PACs coordinating with campaigns has been a driving force behind this Republican party schism. Used to be the National Republican Party would be the main focal point of the big money donors, and they would sort of dictate what went where. This gave the GOP a unified strategy and message.

Now You have a lot of the big donors bypassing the National Republican Party and creating their own PACs. Rather than spreading a unified message with a single strategy, you have a bunch of conflicting personal agendas. Naturally with the current "attack" culture dominant in today's conservatism, those conflicting agendas view each other as the enemy who needs to be destroyed for the sake of "AMERICA!TM", "JesusTM", and "Ronald ReaganTM".
2013-11-09 06:06:04 PM  
2 votes:

cchris_39: "Internecine". Rare that an author or subby sends us to a dictionary. Well done.

The Tea Party is prepared for losses.

/at least this one is

If you had to look up internecine, you are a Teabagger. If you already knew what it meant, you are a Democrat.
2013-11-09 04:44:13 PM  
2 votes:
The "establishment" Republicans don't scare me. They still suck, but at least their motives are very clear and rational, if overwhelmingly greedy and self-serving.

The Tea Party does scare me; not in the sense that I feel they would ever gain enough political clout to permanently shift and alter policy, but the rank-and-file grassroots members are so goddamn ridiculous that constantly being able to throw out these derpy candidates only continues to give the derpy a public voice. Their mere presence only further distorts whatever worthwhile political discourse still exists.
2013-11-09 03:48:33 PM  
2 votes:
The role of money in politics is overblown. Money is necessary but the idea that the person with the biggest war chest wins is false. Having a good candidate with an effective message who has the organizing skills to get out the vote is more important than tens of millions of dollars.
2013-11-09 03:09:55 PM  
2 votes:

cameroncrazy1984: Clear your cookies and cache, use an incognito/private window and you won't have that problem.

Less drastic, so you don't suddenly have to relog on every site in the world:

Right click -> View Page Info -> Security -> View Cookies -> Remove All Cookies

Only removes the current site's cookies.
2013-11-09 11:33:27 AM  
2 votes:

2013-11-10 05:07:06 AM  
1 vote:

meyerkev: Gyrfalcon: The unintended consequences of Citizens United strikes again! Ooorah!

Citizens United was the UTTERLY CORRECT decision.  There's a reason why it was 9-4 (as in 4 judges said "Yeah, this is the correct decision, I just don't like what it implies").

/With the 4.  Absolutely correct.  REALLY don't like where it leads.

...9 to 4?

Anyway, Citizens United would have had a vastly different outcome had it not been argued as a 1st Amendment case. It was that argument--and only that argument--that kept it from being 9-0 or 8-0.

It was a TERRIBLE and UTTERLY WRONG decision.
2013-11-10 04:36:36 AM  
1 vote:

dr_blasto: My hope is these groups dig in and fight until there is only one standing and don't reach some kind of compromise (not that I'm really concerned with these conservatives finding out what compromise is at this point in the game) that allows for the existence of mildly disgruntled social nutters and teabaggers to remain in the Republican Party.

MY hope is that they rip each other apart until, finally, the Tea Party is kicked forcefully out of the Republican fold. At which point, guided by retardedly uncompromising principles, the Tea Party becomes an actual 3rd party funded by SuperPACs established by rich religious figures and organizations.  The R's and the T's smash each other to bits for a few election cycles while the Dems look on in amusement until the religious right is finally marginalized out of existence and we can conduct our elections in a much more sane fashion henceforth.
2013-11-10 04:03:58 AM  
1 vote:

worlddan: The role of money in politics is overblown. Money is necessary but the idea that the person with the biggest war chest wins is false. Having a good candidate with an effective message who has the organizing skills to get out the vote is more important than tens of millions of dollars.

Exactly the reason why Republicans have to cheat and gerrymander and disenfranchise to win. History will bury them.
2013-11-10 02:17:10 AM  
1 vote:
Oh I love this so much.  Not only because of the entertainment value and not even because the chickens have come home to roost, but because all this money they are spending against each other is money they are not spending against Democrats.

Go Conservative Teatards go!  No compromise!  Death to RINOs!  Take back America!  Do not surrender in this... YOUR MOMENT OF TRIUMPH!
2013-11-10 01:28:04 AM  
1 vote:
Winning a political referendum with money doesn't work forever. I can't speak for all examples, but I remember a bit of progressive legislation that came up in our state some time ago. The first time it popped up, the plucky liberal grassroots organization spent, say, one million dollars; the church-backed conservatives spent, say, ten million dollars. The measure went down in defeat.

A few years later, it popped up again. Again, the plucky liberal grassroots organization spent one million dollars, the church-backed conservatives spent ten. Again the measure went down - but the vote was closer.

A few years later, it popped up again.

Now, imagine you're a church-backed conservative with a countermeasure. You're already twenty million into this thing. What's more, polls show a dead heat in this race; even if you do win, it'll probably pop up again in a few years, and next time it'll definitely lose. Do you really want to burn through another ten million dollars of your backers' money on a high risk just to buy a few more years on the winning side of the culture wars? Can you continue to count on your backers' fat checks?

Like gerrymandering, shoveling money into an election seems like it might buy you a couple of cycles, but it won't halt the arc of history. What the church-backed conservatives did third time 'round was gather the usual speechifiers, throw a half-hearted campaign with a few leftover funds, and let the progressives roll right over 'em in a landslide.

I could be wrong about all this. There might be a few referenda that a wheelbarrow of cash have stopped right in their tracks. But I'd be willing to bet that there's a limit to the amount of cash the Koch Bros. are willing to pour into an election before they decide to cut their losses. It's one thing to literally invent your own political party out of the most intransigent of the right-leaners, but if the movement isn't self-sustaining at this point, sooner or later they're going to halt the gravy train.
2013-11-09 05:50:29 PM  
1 vote:
Good. I hope the Tea Party and GOP get slaughtered in many elections to come.
2013-11-09 04:52:48 PM  
1 vote:
Declarations of victory keep coming yet the GOP keeps sticking around stinking up the place.

The whole, "we'll be primaried," argument doesn't make any sense to me.

The teabaggers are relevant, no denying.  Their GOTV efforts and ground game are pretty much all the Republicans still have, since the nobility doesn't do grunt labor very well.  And without that effort most of the evangelicals tend to just stay home unless a particularly "godly" nutjob is running.

But if you win the primary, and the big spenders still generally do, most of those would-be teabagger votes end up going for you instead of just not voting at all in the general.

The teabaggers are 30% of your vote, just spend enough knocking on doors to get 40% of the rest to show up for the primary and you are good to go.
2013-11-09 04:45:38 PM  
1 vote:
Party infighting that will prevent both the GOP and the Teabaggers from winning in 2014 and 2016?  Bueno.
2013-11-09 04:19:44 PM  
1 vote:
2013-11-09 04:14:20 PM  
1 vote:



2013-11-09 04:02:49 PM  
1 vote:

vpb: The money will win.  Crazy doesn't have the staying power that greed has.

Except that the Tea Party has all of the grass roots support that the traditional big business-backed candidates don't have. That's why the 'baggers have stuck around so long. They have more than just the Koch's writing them checks.
2013-11-09 02:04:32 PM  
1 vote:

basemetal: [ image 225x225]
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.