Former Bush Ad Man Forms “Well Funded” Third Party: Needs “Virtual” Candidate for "Virtual" Party
Remember Mark McKinnon? He is hoping you don’t. He is BFF with George W. Bush and did his advertising in the 2000 and 2004 election. McKinnon was Juanita Lozano’s boss. She is the woman who went to jail for mailing a Bush debate tape to Al Gore’s campaign.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1907&dat=20010308&id=Q-NGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qf0MAAAAIBAJ&pg=2666,735722
Now he has a new “virtual” political party, Americans Elect. He has everything he needs---- including seed money from "wealthy hedge fund executives" (see the link below)---except for one thing. He has no “virtual” candidate to represent his “virtual” party.
Hey, Mark, I hear this guy is out of work.
What the hell is a “virtual” political party? Good question. Read what follows and you may begin to suspect that it is nothing but a huge corporate slush fund designed to promote a third party splitter candidate to steal votes from Obama.
Though it will be listed alongside other political parties on state ballots next fall, the group is organized as a social-welfare organization — devoted to promoting no particular candidate, ideology or issue — which allows it to preserve the anonymity of its donors. Some of them, like Ackerman’s father, a New York financier who forked over $5.5 million, have been forthright about their contributions. But the majority remain shrouded in secrecy. For Roemer, who caps donations to his campaign at $100 and won’t accept money from political action committees, the group’s financing structure has sown doubts about its intentions. “I might not be able to participate if the source of funding depends on the very special interests I am trying to force out of the room,” Roemer says.
American Elect says its use of anonymous giving is an effort to safeguard big-ticket donors, well-heeled and connected types who are fearful of retribution. But the explanation hasn’t mollified good-government advocates. “It’s absurd that this group says they want to change the way business is done and they’re attempting to run a candidate for President on the ballot in 50 states with secret money,” says Fred Wertheimer, president of the campaign-finance watchdog group Democracy 21. “If the candidate of Americans Elect were to play a key role in determining the outcome of the 2012 election using secret money to finance their candidate, that would be an extraordinary scandal.”
http://swampland.time.com/2011/12/21/americans-elect-can-a-well-heeled-group-of-insiders-create-a-populist-third-party-sensation/
That last line bears repeating:
“If the candidate of Americans Elect were to play a key role in determining the outcome of the 2012 election using secret money to finance their candidate, that would be an extraordinary scandal.”
I am already appalled. How about you? What I am not is surprised. I have been predicting this GOP election dirty trick since they lost in 2008. If you don't believe me send me an email, and I will direct you to my old journal.
Note that almost every article about American Elect sums up its politics as “well funded.” From today:
"With "none of the above" the default choice for a growing number of voters in next year's presidential election, a well-funded "virtual third party" called Americans Elect plans to offer an alternative by putting a centrist candidate on the ballot in several states."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/20/MNV21MF2LB.DTL
From November:
"The effort is funded with $21 million raised from undisclosed seed donors, reported to be mostly wealthy hedge-fund executives. Ackerman said the group's goal is $30 million to get on ballots and run the process online."
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/11/15/v-print/2776585/virtual-third-party-targets-nc.html
From October:
(T)here's likely to also be a wild card in this election. Americans Elect, a well-funded "virtual third party," plans to put a centrist presidential candidate on the ballot in all 50 states, and while he or she is unlikely to win the presidential election, the presence of a third candidate could still have a major impact on the outcome.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/27/opinion/la-oe-mcmanus-column-third-party-americans-elect-20111027
This media blitz about well known former Bush ad man (and BBF) Mark McKinnon’s “well funded” virtual party is designed to help it solicit money. Lots and lots of corporate money, with a few smaller sums that can be used to back up its claim that it is a populist movement.
Even if this "virtual" party loses its "social-welfare" designation, it should be able to rake in big bucks. Citizens United v. FEC has made it possible for a handful of wealthy oilmen (say, the Koch Brothers) to single handedly bankroll as many third party splitters as they want. These guys and gals do not have to actually garner any votes. All they have to do is clutter up the ballot, making it more difficult for pollsters to predict with any accuracy who will get how many votes. Then, someone with the source code (or even just a cheap box purchased at a hardware store) will flip enough votes from Obama to these “virtual” candidates to cost him the election.
Ever wonder why the GOP presidential candidates (including some real losers like Santorum) are so desperate to get nominated this year? They are convinced that with dirty tricks and corporate money, the Republicans will be able to get anyone selected, the same way they did in 2000.
= new reply since forum marked as read
