Liberty for All Super PAC buying $375K in ads for Jeff Flake

[sailingaway]

I think you nailed it here. If Flake wins, then he is pretty much safe and won't need to raise a ton of cash every six years. The Senate gets a guy that is going to vote with Rand about 90% of the time or more based on his history in the House. The alternative in Cardon is an establishment type, that would essentially have a job in the Senate till he retires. The return on investment is big here.

What some folks here are going to have to come to grips with is that not every Liberty group or PAC feels that a candidate must be a card carrying member of the Mises Institute and have antiwar.com in their bookmarks in order to be someone that warrants support. If someone doesn't like a guy like Flake because of some of the positions he holds, or votes he has made in the past - then fine don't send him any cash. But don't get your panties in a bunch when there are other Liberty minded groups that do back him.

We'll just know they are the sort who don't care if those they back are liberty candidates. It is a good way to identify groups.

 

[AJ Antimony]

I think you nailed it here. If Flake wins, then he is pretty much safe and won't need to raise a ton of cash every six years. The Senate gets a guy that is going to vote with Rand about 90% of the time or more based on his history in the House. The alternative in Cardon is an establishment type, that would essentially have a job in the Senate till he retires. The return on investment is big here.

What some folks here are going to have to come to grips with is that not every Liberty group or PAC feels that a candidate must be a card carrying member of the Mises Institute and have antiwar.com in their bookmarks in order to be someone that warrants support. If someone doesn't like a guy like Flake because of some of the positions he holds, or votes he has made in the past - then fine don't send him any cash. But don't get your panties in a bunch when there are other Liberty minded groups that do back him.

Some people also forget the good things some candidates have done. Bring up Flake on these boards, and the responses are all about his wrong NDAA and Patriot Act votes (which is very true and very understandable). But what about his good votes? Does he not deserve any credit for being 1 of the only 2 Republicans to consistently vote against Bush spending policies? Does he not deserve any credit for joining Ron Paul and 1 other House Republican in voting against Sarbanes-Oxley? He voted against No Child, against Medicare Part D, against additional defense appropriations, against the bailout... ALL during the Bush years. Not to mention his independent behavior got him kicked off the judiciary committee for "bad behavior." He also voted to repeal DADT...

 

[tbone717]

Some people also forget the good things some candidates have done. Bring up Flake on these boards, and the responses are all about his wrong NDAA and Patriot Act votes (which is very true and very understandable). But what about his good votes? Does he not deserve any credit for being 1 of the only 2 Republicans to consistently vote against Bush spending policies? Does he not deserve any credit for joining Ron Paul and 1 other House Republican in voting against Sarbanes-Oxley? He voted against No Child, against Medicare Part D, against additional defense appropriations, against the bailout... ALL during the Bush years. Not to mention his independent behavior got him kicked off the judiciary committee for "bad behavior." He also voted to repeal DADT...

I'm at the point where I just ignore the naysayers. There's too much work to be done to get bogged down with them.

 

[AJ Antimony]

To me, the bigger problem isn't Flake. It's the fact that Flake is leading in the primaries by over 20% AND he has millions of cash on hand. He also has Club for Growth spending huge amounts money for him.

I just don't see the need or the urgency to help out Flake when it's very likely he will win on his own.

There has only been one recent poll on this primary race, and yes it says his lead is around 20%. HOWEVER, that poll was commissioned by a group that is affiliated with Flake, so it's probably not entirely realistic. Maybe Flake's lead is 10%?

It's true that Flake has about $2.5 million on hand... but so does his primary opponent. His primary opponent has also spent about $2 million MORE than Flake. His opponent has also raised* about $2 million MORE than Flake. On top of that, the Democrat in this race is uncontested, and actually has some experience, unlike typical Democratic AZ statewide candidates. He currently has about $1.5 million on hand in preparation for the general. http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2012&id=AZS2

Finally, the primary election is still an entire month away and I suspect Flake's primary opponent will continue dumping in his own money. Before the election, the opponent promised he would not be outspent in this primary election. I understand your point completely, and you may end up being right, but I'd still feel more comfortable treating this race as if Flake is 10% down.

*Flake actually fundraises. His opponent spends his own money.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Flake is shit and so is Schwiekert- are you kidding me. Bentovolio and Robinson please. Flake was totally sucking off Romney after the caucus here.

YAL endorsed Schweikert. So is YAL shit too?

See post #6 in this thread. I love Robinson but unfortunately he's a complete waste of money. He's running in a safe Democratic district! The only reason he came somewhat close in 2010 and the only reason he will come somewhat close in 2012 is that these are super Republican years. As soon as the electorate mellows out, he's going to lose re-election no matter how he votes!

The fact is, if you want a solid core of elected officials who will defend liberty over the years, they have to represent safe districts.

 

[tbone717]

The fact is, if you want a solid core of elected officials who will defend liberty over the years, they have to represent safe districts.

And the big part of the overall strategy is to be able to build coalitions in the House and Senate so that we have the votes to get legislation through. This is precisely why in Hunter's video last month, he mentioned allying with guys/girls that we agree with on MOST issues. He did not say we have to agree with everyone on every issue. You work with Flake, for example, on the issues where you see eye to eye, and you work with others on the other issues. And when it comes to those issues that there is a difference, who is going to be more likely to be influenced, someone we ally with or someone that we do not ally with? Rand will have a far better working relationship with Flake than he would with Cardon.

If the Liberty Movement ever expects to see a majority in either chamber, it will need to be built with some degree of diversity. That does not mean that we just cozy up to every single candidate, but we find the ones who are with us on 90% or more and build coalitions. That's how politics works.

 

[Sola_Fide]

YAL endorsed Schweikert. So is YAL shit too?

See post #6 in this thread. I love Robinson but unfortunately he's a complete waste of money. He's running in a safe Democratic district! The only reason he came somewhat close in 2010 and the only reason he will come somewhat close in 2012 is that these are super Republican years. As soon as the electorate mellows out, he's going to lose re-election no matter how he votes!

The fact is, if you want a solid core of elected officials who will defend liberty over the years, they have to represent safe districts.

Agree. The focus for the future should be to field liberty candidates in safe Republican districts.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Agree. The focus for the future should be to field liberty candidates in safe Republican districts.

Yep, and what we all have to understand is that the only way to do this is locally. We can't just sit here at our desks and say stuff like "WOW District X in Texas is now open! Find a candidate!" We have to control local GOPs so we can field strong candidates in each and every congressional district, especially the safe ones.

Personally, my heart breaks every time I learn of an open GOP district that a Ron Paul candidate does not run in. Speaking of Schweikert/Quayle/Arizona, a great example is from Arizona in 2010. John Shadegg represented a safe GOP district from 1995-2011. He retired and decided not to seek re-election in 2010. The resulting primary? 11 Republican candidates and not one of them a Ron Paul candidate. The result? Quayle wins with 22% of the vote. Ron Paul Nation is LUCKY that Quayle's home was drawn out of the district and Schweikert's home was drawn into the district.

 

[tbone717]

Yep, and what we all have to understand is that the only way to do this is locally. We can't just sit here at our desks and say stuff like "WOW District X in Texas is now open! Find a candidate!" We have to control local GOPs so we can field strong candidates in each and every congressional district, especially the safe ones.

Furthermore, we need to be prudent in the races we choose to support financially. Unseating a popular incumbent is a difficult task (particularly in the House), so dumping tons of money and time into a race that is essentially unwinnable will drain us of resources that could be used on winnable races.

 

[Adrock]

Flake is pretty solid on most of the issues. Even on the ones that we disagree with him on, he may be able to be reasoned with in the future. Especially if we start getting more liberty minded people around him. He may not be money bomb worthy, but I wouldn't have any problem voting for him over the average neocon.

 

[sailingaway]

Some people also forget the good things some candidates have done. Bring up Flake on these boards, and the responses are all about his wrong NDAA and Patriot Act votes (which is very true and very understandable). But what about his good votes? Does he not deserve any credit for being 1 of the only 2 Republicans to consistently vote against Bush spending policies? Does he not deserve any credit for joining Ron Paul and 1 other House Republican in voting against Sarbanes-Oxley? He voted against No Child, against Medicare Part D, against additional defense appropriations, against the bailout... ALL during the Bush years. Not to mention his independent behavior got him kicked off the judiciary committee for "bad behavior." He also voted to repeal DADT...

I sure wouldn't belong to a group or give money to a pac that might spend resources on him, no. Would I say 'that was a good vote'? Sure. But, imho, we need to HEAVILY support ACTUAL liberty candidates. There are plenty of MIC candidates who get plenty of funding elsewhere.

 

[sailingaway]

Flake is pretty solid on most of the issues. Even on the ones that we disagree with him on, he may be able to be reasoned with in the future. Especially if we start getting more liberty minded people around him. He may not be money bomb worthy, but I wouldn't have any problem voting for him over the average neocon.

I would vote for him over the average neocon, since they are big government everywhere ON TOP of being for the police state. I would never consider him a liberty candidate, nor those funding him liberty organizations. If 'liberty' doesn't go to the point of 'no police state' what meaning does it possibly have?

 

[LibertyEagle]

I'm at the point where I just ignore the naysayers. There's too much work to be done to get bogged down with them.

Yes, he has done some good things. Also, some very bad.

With limited resources, I'd rather be throwing money towards people like Kurt Bills.

 

[sailingaway]

Yes, he has done some good things. Also, some very bad.

With limited resources, I'd rather be throwing money towards people like Kurt Bills.

This, on the other hand it is their money, it just makes it clear I don't want to donate there.

 

[LibertyEagle]

This, on the other hand it is their money, it just makes it clear I don't want to donate there.

I don't know about the latter. John asked for our input. Did we give it? I know that I didn't.

All i know is that if we do not do everything in our power to help Bills, our movement is all fluff.

 

[sailingaway]

I don't know about the latter. John asked for our input. Did we give it? I know that I didn't.

All i know is that if we do not do everything in our power to help Bills, our movement is all fluff.

they didn't say 'what about these candidates'. I did speak about Kerry. I would have definitely spoken up about Flake, in the negative fashion. But you are right that this may be growing pains. I should have said 'if that is the kind of candidate they plan to support, I'm not interested'.

 

[tbone717]

Yes, he has done some good things. Also, some very bad.

With limited resources, I'd rather be throwing money towards people like Kurt Bills.

Possibly they might be looking at it in terms of ROI. With Bills being down 25 points in a strong blue state they may not see that as being a good use of their money. But who knows, maybe they will throw some cash his way down the road.

 

[sailingaway]

Possibly they might be looking at it in terms of ROI. With Bills being down 25 points in a strong blue state they may not see that as being a good use of their money. But who knows, maybe they will throw some cash his way down the road.

I just don't see how a liberty organization would spend money on someone who voted to make the Patriot Act permanent and for NDAA. Who WANTS a 'return' on that? But LE makes a good point. the PAC may have been sold on Flake by someone who carefully neglected to mention that.

 

[trey4sports]

I just don't see how a liberty organization would spend money on someone who voted to make the Patriot Act permanent and for NDAA. Who WANTS a 'return' on that? But LE makes a good point. the PAC may have been sold on Flake by someone who carefully neglected to mention that.

I don't think so. These guys are not going to send someone 400K without looking at his voting record.

IMO there are 2 possible explanations.


A. They felt like his voting record and ability to retain the seat for a long period of time (if he wins this election of course) is good enough to make a big investment now for a possible 20-30 year senate run.

B. Someone earmarked 400K to go to his reelection. It is possible that someone talked to John and said something like.... I'll donate 500K if, in return, you make sure that 400K goes directly to Jeff Flake.

 

[sailingaway]

I don't think so. These guys are not going to send someone 400K without looking at his voting record.

IMO there are 2 possible explanations.


A. They felt like his voting record and ability to retain the seat for a long period of time (if he wins this election of course) is good enough to make a big investment now for a possible 20-30 year senate run.

B. Someone earmarked 400K to go to his reelection. It is possible that someone talked to John and said something like.... I'll donate 500K if, in return, you make sure that 400K goes directly to Jeff Flake.

If the latter, that 'someone' is trying to pretend Flake is a liberty candidate, but it is possible. But if they knew he voted for NDAA and to make the Patriot Act permanent and STILL supported him, they aren't what I hoped they were. If it was someone else's money so they didn't really look, or they listened to someone who they thought was picking only liberty candidates and just picked a bad one accidentally, that is isolatable.