finish the fight. VIDEO: Anti-Romney TV ad... from Republicans.Submitted by Zack on Tue, 09/25/2012 - 21:25
(edit: request for feedback/input erased due to the ad being in finishing stages. Outdated links/info removed)
Questions and Clarifications
Why is this about Romney? Isn't he just a pawn of the RNC, banks, et al? Yes and no. It is my understanding that a number of people on Romney's payroll actively collaborated with people in the RNC to disenfranchise voters in Maine, Tampa, and elsewhere. Also, in my estimation, going after Romney is currently the best way to strike back at the corrupt RNC elements in general.
How are funds raised/spent? After looking at all the options, I decided that a "super" PAC was the best way to raise funds. I have set up the PAC, Grand Old Principles, for this purpose. I am the treasurer and manager. I receive no salary. This PAC is really only there to raise money for this one single ad. No other strategies will be funded, and the PAC will be completely terminated after the election. In fact, I will probably stop accepting donations around Oct. 24th, because of the delays in transferring money and buying ad time, so we're talking about a TINY window of opportunity. The entire fundraising push will begin when the video is completed and last only last about 3 weeks. There will probably be a very small amount of money left in the bank at the end, to cover things like reversed donations. 100% of that will go to a worthy cause, such as the FSP or EFF. In case the usual FEC public reporting regulations and penalties aren't enough to instill confidence in me, I plan to release the actual bank record of withdrawals (expenditures), accounting for every single penny raised, at the conclusion of the campaign.
I think Romney is going to lose anyway, so why bother? It's really hard to say if that's true, since one moment in a debate or elsewhere could tank the Obama campaign or strengthen the Romney campaign overnight. In any event, it's sort of beside the point. If he loses, I suggest that it benefits us to have Romney not only lose, but to suffer an embarrassing defeat. It's really about establishing the precedent of consequences. About making the bite be felt as strongly as possible, not whether it happened to be the fatal bite this time around or not.
What the proposal IS:
*Above all, a precedent. A warning to establishment Republican leadership that they drew the short stick. They're in the one corrupt political party with a highly motivated and organized self-policing element.
*A warning to independent and undecided voters for the general election about Mitt Romney.
*Sincerely Republican, as in the Republican Party. I see this as ballsy entrenchment, not spiteful retreat.
*About justice for Republicans and all people that value fairness and honesty.
*Hopefully going to receive a good amount of free media publicity, due to the novelty of it being a general election attack ad from within the same party.
*100% grassroots. Either gauntlet-approved, or gauntlet-denied.
*highly pragmatic and long-term goal-oriented.
*Synergistic with other campaigns like "write in Ron Paul 2012" or "Gary Johnson 2012", for obvious reasons.
*An effort to make Romney lose (or come closer to losing, or lose by a larger amount).
What the proposal ISN'T:
*An effort to make Obama win (or come closer to winning - it's about Romney/RNC/etc., not about his opponents).
*about political policies. (it's very narrowly focused on corruption and Romney's illegitimacy.)
*Hoping to appeal to party loyalist Republicans. (under no illusions, there)
*Officially (or even unofficially) related to the Paul campaign or Ron Paul.
*Produced with the blessing or supposed blessing of Ron Paul. If Ron Paul, or anyone else for that matter, suggested that the TV campaign should be suspended, they would be roundly ignored. That's because this is about serving the disenfranchised voters, not serving any politicians, great though they may be.
*An actual ad for Gary Johnson, any other candidate, or a Ron Paul write-in campaign.
*A general ad to warn off political parties from corruption. Instead, it's more a message specifically to the corrupt Republicans that they won't get the free ride that the other corrupt parties get.
^^I'm not saying the above are good/bad goals, but I am saying that this specific ad campaign will be strengthened by having a narrow focus. This isn't for legal reasons, it's just that I don't want to let subjectivity enter the picture, and give the establishment a position to argue from. Romney has no defense against these claims, except a really weak "I don't/didn't know because I was focused on the issues instead of the process" defense, but that is no defense at all, since these actions have been coordinated by multiple people on Mitt's own payroll, under his direct supervision.
To my mind, this is the most obvious thing since breathing, and I'm genuinely surprised that I haven't seem MULTIPLE other similar proposals gaining traction all over the place. But maybe I'm mistaken on that. I guess time will tell.
A lot of us are extremely unhappy with the spending choices of liberty "candidate campaigns" and "issue campaigns" we've been donating to, and we've been getting pretty weary of donating something other than our time and energy. Here is something so specific that you know ahead of time where the money is going, and if it's something you support, you can donate to airtime, here: http://www.grandoldprinciples.com