"Far Right" can't win for GOP? ...BS!

[Boss]

Indeed, Boss is a "low intellect far right reactionary" in my book.

I called you that because you can't back up your arguments with clear data.

Skylar's poll is not quite accurate, but the "60.8%" that indicates right-leaning or conservative contradicts with your solid statement earlier that conservatives make up 60% of the country. So misstatement on your part. No, being right leaning does not mean "'moderate' are indeed conservative thinkers."

Your definition of Conservatism includes your far right reactionary ideology, which is indeed Extremism.

"THEY call a "moderate" which is basically a non-conservative who isn't full-blown Liberal" is the second stupidest statement of the day. That is your opinion, nothing more.

Many Conservatives are not extreme or far right. You, Boss, are, however. And then you try to include them in your group. That is a fail.

The GOP will win the presidency by reaching out to women and minorities where they are. The moderates and centrists are not going to convert to your silly ideology.

Five of the last six elections have proved that, and now the Millennials are voting as a full group for the very first time. The numbers are bad for the right and very bad for you on the far right. They will not as a voting block choose for "more conservative" candidates. Won't happen.

You have to change, not the electorate.

The truth is that most of the electorate is nothing like you and does not want to be.

Okay... So in Jake's Rules of Debate, whenever Jake states something is a fact it cannot be questioned even when it is only his opinion, and when he has stated his "Jake Facts", any challenge or contradiction that is raised or brought up is automatically a lie because Jake says so, and Jake's opinion rules. Any actual facts which might conflict with Jake are immediately dismissed as bollocks and poppycock.... again, based on the unequivocal opinions of Jake.

Under "Jake's Unquestionable and Infallible Law of Politics" only the "Millennial" (and what they think) is important. All other political views are antiquated and thus already a part of the dustbin of history and should be forgotten. Old geezers over 40 should simply be disallowed the vote because they are so out of touch with modern times. This also includes all Religious people, even if they are technically "Millennials" because they are misinformed and brainwashed individuals who can't be trusted.

We can listen to Liberals, they are smart and intelligent.. and the Millennials like them and think they are cool. But in order to appear "objective" we have to claim that we're not "Liberal" but rather "Moderate" and maybe even "Republican" but not the "FAR RIGHT" (aka: Conservative) kind.

Does that about sum up your philosophy, Jakester?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Facts can be challenged. My facts withstand challenge, whereas yours don't. Either they are inaccurate or you have misanalyzed them, deliberately, a Rushbot 'interpreter' attempt to redirect the conversation.

The Millennials are important. For the first time they will be the largest generation voting bloc, and the older aging generations are losing tons of votes every month.

Another fact is that most American Christians do not agree with the social con so-called conservative Christians on the far right.

The pie chart above does not lie, where you do. Anybody can check the last few pages to see what you are doing, then laugh, when they realize, Boss, how bad you are at it.

 

[Skylar]

Conservative votes stayed at home.

That lie has already been debunked in this very thread. Parroting it again does not make it any less a lie. A greater percentage of CON$ervoFascists voted for Bishop Willard and McSame than for either Reagan election.

The first number is the total number of conservatives who voted for the Republican candidate. The second is the conservatives' percentage of the total vote. In 2012, 37 million conservatives voted for Mitt Romney, and conservatives were 35% of the total who voted.

2012 37mm, 35%
2008 34.8mm, 34%
2004 34.9mm, 34%
2000 24.8mm, 29%
1996 23.6mm, 34%
1992 20mm, 30%
1988 24.5mm, 33%
1984 25.1mm, 33%
1980 17.7mm, 28%

But your stats are incorrect because you're counting people on the basis of how they self identify and we know that isn't accurate. You honestly believe that less than half the votes George W. Bush received in 2000 were from conservatives? Smoke a lot of crack in the mornings, do ya?

All this statistic shows is how popular or unpopular it was to call yourself a conservative at the time. In means absolutely nothing in terms of who voted. Stats such as these completely dismiss ALL moderates and independents as "not conservative" votes. The truth is, MOST of the independent and moderate votes are conservatives. They may not be comfortable self identifying as such, but they are philosophically conservative.

The lie is "The truth is, MOST of the independent and moderate votes are conservatives." The low intellect far right reactionary is asserting as fact the data does not support. So, let him try, and I will gut the data he provides.

Ah... So now I am a "low intellect far right reactionary" in your book? We see the tactic here... you never made the case that I was "far right" or "reactionary" and now you've added "low intellect" because I challenged you. This is really ALL you have, baseless rhetoric and false claims, which you've apparently convinced yourself are true or you think it can be made true by constantly repeating it as if you've established it as factual.

The Gallup poll posted by Skylar, your Liberal buddy, shows that 33% of Independent voters identified as conservative and 24% identified as liberal. Pew Research did a survey several years ago which encompassed a collection of polls on various left/right issues and found that 60.8% of us are right-leaning or conservative. This included the "mushy middle" and proves that most "moderates" are indeed conservative thinkers.

Pew in 2014 found that 34% of the population was consistently or mostly liberal. 27% were consistently or mostly conservative. And 39% were mixed. With the greatest shift being among 'mixed' views...which reduced from 49% in 1992. And a rise in consistently liberal and mostly liberal who were 21% in 1994. With conservatives losing only a little ground, moving from 30% to 27%.

Political Polarization in the American Public Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

Per your own source, there's been a strong shift toward liberalism in the last 20 years. With a whopping 73% of the population being either liberal or mixed in political affinity.

Gallup doesn't show as large a shift, but it does show a strong reduction in those who self identify as conservatives, with that number being 1 point off an all time low. While liberals are at an all time high.

Two polls, including your own, showing the same trend. A move away from conservatism and toward liberalism. And in this environment you imagine that 'real conservative candidates' are going to win?

Um, no. Republicans are, by far, the most sympathetic to the conservative message. And they don't want what you describe as a 'real conservative'. There's no indication that the public at large would be more receptive republicans. And there's plenty indicating they would be less.

Your argument is debunked yet again.

 

[Jroc]

No.

In negotiations with Tipp O'Neal, Reagan asked for and got SIX tax hikes.

You will not be allowed to re-write history just to make Reagan look perfect. He was not.

Maybe you should learn a little history genius

Over the course of his two terms in office, Reagan presided over several changes to the tax code. What is important to remember — what isvital to understand — is that not all taxes are created equal.
When Democrats or media embrace Reagan for “raising taxes X number of times,” they are usually engaging in willful obfuscation. This is because they know that when most people hear the words, “tax hike,” they naturally assume you mean raising income taxes. But tax rates (both nominal and effective) dropped dramatically across-the-board during Reagan’s tenure.

Not only did the top individual income tax rate go from 70 to 28 percent! — but the tax code was also indexed for inflation (this is a big deal, because inflation had heretofore pushed people into higher tax brackets — a double whammy.)

Yet the notion that Reagan was a tax-hiker has persisted. In recent years, Republicans ranging from former Sen.

Alan Simpson to Reagan aide Bruce Bartlett have been cited noting that Reagan raised taxes (he did.) But their statements are often taken out of context — as if to muddy the waters — to make it appear that Reagan was a fan of tax hikes.

T

he typical tactic is to say Reagan raised taxes 11 or 12 times (the exact number depends on whom you ask.) But it’s unhelpful — in fact, it’s a bit misleading — to talk about how many times Reagan raised taxes. That’s because (as noted earlier) tax increases are not created equal. Some are much worse than others. And many of Reagan’s so-called “tax increases” were actually examples of ending deductions

Overall, Reagan dramatically cut the most odious of taxes.

So, for those who care about the truth, here are some details. One of the tax increases Reagan signed (the

]Highway Revenue Act of 1982) was a temporary increase in the federal gas tax from 4 to 9 cents. (This could be thought of as a sort of “user fee,” inasmuch as the revenue generally went to roads and infrastructure.) Another was a cigarette tax (Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985.) These are real tax increases, but should not be confused with the income tax.

(Reagan also deserves special criticism from free marketers on the right for raising the capital gains tax rate — as well as the corporate rate — in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.)

Make no mistake, these were real tax increases — in some cases, “regressive” taxation — but they pale in comparison to the scale of the income tax cuts that defined the Reagan era. Again, it’s important to put things in context. When inaugurated, Reagan inherited a nation with 16 tax brackets — ranging from marginal rates of 14 percent to 70 percent. By 1989, that was down to two brackets — with marginal rates of 15 percent and 28 percent

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/06/ronald-reagan-raised-taxes-11-times-the-real-story/

Ah, yes, the vaunted historical site of the Daily Caller.

Facts are facts sweetie some day you actually learn what tax reform means

 

[Jroc]

There's no such thing as a 'Far-Right'.

One either Recognizes, Respects, Defends and Adheres to the Principles that define America, or one does not and since there's no such thing as "REALLY Recognizing, Respecting, Defending, and Adhering to American Principles, well... you know.

The thing to understand however is that where one runs a campaign resting upon those principles... one wins. And that is because those principles speak to the human soul.

And what exactly are American principles as set forth by those who wrote our Constitution? Oh yes, slavery is fine. Blacks and women cannot vote. In fact, only land owners can vote. Hell, women could only own land under certain special circumstances. I'm a bit tired of right wing nutters assuming their version of America is the only one that is legitimate.

This guys post is proof of the narrow minded non thinking of the left America haters

Jroc's post is proof that he is the rep of the mindless far right haters.

Jake says he's Ford Republican. The only president in American history who wasn't elected..... It figures

 

[Jroc]

"Democrats made the KKK and socialists are Nazi" is typical, debunked far righty low intellect nonsense.

Conservatives, Dem and Pub, made the KKK, and Conservatives and Liberals, Dem and Pub, nationally destroyed its power and segregation.

Fascism is right wing progressive oriented tyranny, using the Party and the State to tyrannize the population.

Describes the leftist perfectly. Congratulations Jake


Wisconsin: special prosecutor raids Walker supporters

A secret special prosecutor wielding “kitchen-sink” subpoenas takes aim at persons and groups who supported Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in his recent showdown with public employee unions. “The probe began in the office of Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf, though no one will publicly claim credit for appointing Mr. Schmitz, the special prosecutor. The investigation is taking place under Wisconsin’s John Doe law, which bars a subpoena’s targets from disclosing its contents to anyone but his attorneys. … [Wisconsin Club for Growth director Eric O’Keefe] adds that at least three of the targets had their homes raided at dawn, with law-enforcement officers turning over belongings to seize computers and files

Wisconsin special prosecutor raids Walker supporters - Overlawyered


IRS TARGETED TEA PARTY GROUPS

The Internal Revenue Service apologized Friday for subjecting Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status to special scrutiny. An inspector general's report to be released this week provides a timeline of events.

IRS separates Tea Party applications
In an attempt to manage a deluge of tax-exempt applications, an IRS unit in Cincinnati first starts to search out applications from groups with political-sounding names, including those with "Tea Party" in their name, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. Those applications would be forwarded to specialists for additional scrutiny

IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups

 

[Jroc]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

 

[Skylar]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

 

[TemplarKormac]

a) Disagreed that the KKK, Neo Nazis,etc (or x) are far right.

Quote the post.

By the way 'x' is not a political position. It is a letter in the alphabet.

b) Made a 'I don't care what you think' reply.

Quote the post.

c) Made an issue out my post pointing out that the right vs left is a flawed spectrum to analyze politics.

Quote the post.

So, yes, there is proof Cecilie supports x through Cecilie's statements, unless Cecilie states he/she doesn't support x.

Yet you won't cite a direct quote from her confirming this position.

 

[Jroc]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

 

[Skylar]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

 

[Jroc]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that. Hillary pledges to rise 2 billion dollars. "but hey" keep trying to convince yourself the leftist Democrats are the party of the poor

 

[Skylar]

Both major parties are progressive indeed.

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

 

[Jroc]

The establishment, crony capitalist, certainly are, as are you . Ted Cruz for president

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

 

[Skylar]

Ted, whose campaigned is largely supported by Hedge Fund Managers and Billionairres? That's your remedy for crony capitalism?

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

 

[Jroc]

LOL... Not hardly sweetie.


In a Short Time, Ted Cruz Has Raised Big Money From Small Donors
Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican senator, raised nearly $4 million in the eight days after he announced his presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal. What’s important about that number is that almost all of it came in amounts of less than $100.

That’s a big change for Mr. Cruz. During his Senate run in 2012, 80 percent of the money he collected from individuals were in donations of $200 or more, the threshold for when donor’s names are listed on Federal Election Commission reports.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/u...ing-means-and-doesnt.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.

Even in the context of a presidential campaign cycle in which the major party nominees are expected to raise more than $1.5 billion, Cruz’s haul is eye-popping, one that instantly raises the stakes in the Republican fundraising contest.

Exclusive New Ted Cruz Super-PACs Take in Record Haul - Bloomberg Politics

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

The super PACs aren't required to disclose donor information with the FEC until July but a source familiar with the fundraising movement told National Review Online that each of the four PACs will have the patronage of one "particular donor or donor family."

Billionaire New York financier Robert Mercer and his family are involved in at least one of the "Keep the Promise" PACs, according to NRO.

Read more: Ted Cruz super PACs raising 31 million - Business Insider

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

One of the key funders, according to Bloomberg, appears to be the family of Robert Mercer, a leader of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies in New York.The Mercer role may explain why one of the Cruz-aligned groups, Keep the Promise I, has a New York address, while Texas is home to the others (Keep the Promise, Keep the Promise II, and Keep the Promise III).

The 31 million week big for Ted Cruz but also for his super PAC donors video - CSMonitor.com

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

LOL...Really? Hillary Clinton along with her husband's personal fortune is upwards of 130 million dollars. she got rich off of "serving" the people. You're not too bright are you

 

[Skylar]

Ah, but honey.....that's chump change compared to the Pro-Cruz PACs.

So that's almost 8 times what your little 'under 100' crowd managed. And that's WITHOUT Cruz's largest backers.

With this reaffirmed by other sources:

But hey, you keep trying to convince yourself that the favored candidates of billionaries and hedgefund managers is the remedy for 'crony capitalism'.

I'll keep giggling at your naivete.

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

LOL...Really? Hillary Clinton along with her husband's personal fortune is upwards of 130 million dollars. she got rich off of "serving" the people. You're not too bright are you

Didn't Cruz's wife work for Goldman Sachs?

But he's NOT going to make policy that benefits the investment bankers?

I just want to put you in my pocket and feed you with an eye dropper you're so cute!

 

[Jroc]

It takes money to win genius, but maybe you're too stupid to realize that.

\

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

LOL...Really? Hillary Clinton along with her husband's personal fortune is upwards of 130 million dollars. she got rich off of "serving" the people. You're not too bright are you

Didn't Cruz's wife work for Goldman Sachs?

But he's NOT going to make policy that benefits the investment bankers?

I just want to put you in my pocket and feed you with an eye dropper you're so cute!

The key word there is "work" Something Bill and Hillary have never done in their lives. I'm glad i could help clear that up for you

 

[Skylar]

You just figured that out, honey? That's cute. But the question you're still not quite able to wrap your head around is WHOSE money? Do you honestly think that hedge fund managers and billionares are going to offer Cruz the lion share of his campaign's support...

...and want nothing back?

Oh, sweetie......you are a giggle fest!

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

LOL...Really? Hillary Clinton along with her husband's personal fortune is upwards of 130 million dollars. she got rich off of "serving" the people. You're not too bright are you

Didn't Cruz's wife work for Goldman Sachs?

But he's NOT going to make policy that benefits the investment bankers?

I just want to put you in my pocket and feed you with an eye dropper you're so cute!

The key word there is "work" Something Bill and Hillary have never done in their lives. I'm glad i could help clear that up for you

The key words are 'bought' and 'sold'. Investment bankers, hedge fund managers and billionaries are supporting Cruz for a reason:

He represents their interests. Investment bankers, hedge fund managers and billionaires don't necessarily represent YOUR interests. And its downright adorable that you don't get that, hun.

The Crony Capitalists have spoken. And you're backing their candidate.

 

[Jroc]

Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative unlike the likes of Hillary Clinton. Maybe you'd like for him to be handcuffed and only rely on small donors? You're funny, delusional but funny. Who are you supporting sweetie? Mother Teresa is dead

Ted Cruz is bought and paid for by the uber wealthy. And that's who his proposed policies will benefit the most.

But its cute that you don't get that.

LOL...Really? Hillary Clinton along with her husband's personal fortune is upwards of 130 million dollars. she got rich off of "serving" the people. You're not too bright are you

Didn't Cruz's wife work for Goldman Sachs?

But he's NOT going to make policy that benefits the investment bankers?

I just want to put you in my pocket and feed you with an eye dropper you're so cute!

The key word there is "work" Something Bill and Hillary have never done in their lives. I'm glad i could help clear that up for you

The key words are 'bought' and 'sold'. Investment bankers, hedge fund managers and billionaries are supporting Cruz for a reason:

He represents their interests.

Investment bankers, hedge fund managers and billionaires don't necessarily represent YOUR interests. And its downright adorable that you don't get that, hun.

i suppose it's better than foreign money ...Hillary loves you... 130 million dollars and Hillary has never held a job in the private sector