Ok, here's a piece of news that should be pretty uncontroversial:
Jeb Bush's SuperPAC is making it's move
Jeb, early on, got 100 million in donations to his Superpac (and much less to his actual campaign, hence his money problems). Now the PAC is spending it in attack ads against Rubio, Kasich, and Chris Christie, i.e. the establishment contenders with some support, while not touching either Trump or Cruz.
The strategy is clearly, 'take out every establishment opponent, and then hope that when push comes to shove, the party will go with the last establishment pick standing over the outsiders.
The article speaks in defense of the campaign's strategist, noting how little they have to work with to potentially give Jeb a chance, but when the establishment can't get higher than third place, it's richest member carpet-bombing only the establishment candidates seems like it hurts that side in general.
Well, a strategy’s a strategy. May we point out just how sad this strategy is? It’s not Murphy’s fault, entirely, that Bush has proven to be an inept campaigner who’s unable to build traction anywhere. His job is to come up with some strategy to get this boob of a candidate through the primaries, and if step one of that strategy is something as hilarious as “spend lots of money to make sure Marco Rubio doesn’t finish third in Iowa,” well, at least one can admire Murphy’s professional loyalty to a doomed cause.Let’s blame the stupid Bush donors instead, the dolts who gave this guy $100 million upfront without asking for so much as a single demonstration of political skill in a 17-man, 2015 political environment. In September, I asked if the donor class had created a monster in Bush: a weak candidate with too much pride and money who would get in the way of a more viable candidate like Rubio or even, at this point, Christie. This is exactly what his super PAC is now doing. It would—even now!—be foolish to completely rule out Bush’s chance of winning the nomination, simply because of all that money and the breadth of his national organization. But it’s a slim chance, and it requires the total destruction of every other candidate whom the party establishment could tolerate.
Basically, the article calls his early donors dumbasses, and the result is backfiring on the cause they support, even if it does technically keep Jeb in the game- barely.
Really rips into Jeb. I mean, the fact he's having to worry about, not just Rubio, but Kasich and Christie as priority targets says a bunch on it's own.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
As ever, people, be wary of unattributed quotes- they tend to be made-up gibberish.Anyway, get this back to topic now the troll is gone.
So just to be clear are you saying the quotes attributed to Hilary Clinton saying she admires this racist piece of shit are made up? Or the quotes painting Sanger as racist are made up? Or both?
No, he's saying that the quotes on Sanger were likely BS or highly stretched truths or just taken out of context
Read for yourself: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/08/20/false-narratives-margaret-sanger-used-shame-black-women/
Maybe you should read that article written by a black woman, it criticizes Sanger, but does it fairly, as opposed to the "Sanger wanted to eliminate all blacks!" nonsense that sock-troll posted.
ps You should stop listening to sock-trolls, they're just here to post nonsense to get an emotional response
Originally posted by Robtard
Maybe you should read that article written by a black woman, it criticizes Sanger, but does it fairly, as opposed to the "Sanger wanted to eliminate all blacks!" nonsense that sock-troll posted.ps You should stop listening to sock-trolls, they're just here to post nonsense to get an emotional response
So okay break it down: this woman was racist, yes or no? Not asking if she wanted to wipe out all blacks, was she racist?
Originally posted by Surtur
So okay break it down: this woman was racist, yes or no? Not asking if she wanted to wipe out all blacks, was she racist?
Possibly, as pointed out, but her vernacular was of the times and how she referred to black people can be seen as racist. She also worked and tried to help the black community as a whole.
Maybe you should just read the article?