PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Shawn on May 14, 2016, 11:13:56 AM
-
Learned a little tidbit today from an old political operative...one of the driving decisions behind Cruz announcing Carly then bailing was for a money haul. Part of the Cruz/Fiorina partnership was that Cruz assumed the debt of Carly's failed 2010 California senate race who was still in the red and lots of debts unpaid. By making the announcement they were able to do a final fundraising push to wipe out her debt as well as a final last hoorah fundraising call to leave the Cruz campaign from ending in the red as he wanted to get reelected to his senate seat even though he knew it was the end of the road for the national ticket.
Walker camping however is still $1 million in the hole owed to vendors.
Not read on Drudge report...but rather from an insider that got paid off by Caryl's 2010 campaign just last week and know both parties very well.
Money makes the world go round and people get played!
-
This makes 3 failed campaigns for Carly. Maybe she should hang it up and forget politics, but I'm sure she'll be around for a while.
-
She is a multimillionaire. If she was stiffing her vendors from her campaign as she sits on her pile of gold, it tells us all we need to know about this dirtbag.
-
She is a multimillionaire. If she was stiffing her vendors from her campaign as she sits on her pile of gold, it tells us all we need to know about this dirtbag.
Who pissed in your Cheerios today? What makes her a dirtbag? She didn't stiff vendors. It just took time to pay off.
I contributed a small amount to Scott Walker recently to help pay off his debt. That's how this works.
-
Who pissed in your Cheerios today? What makes her a dirtbag? She didn't stiff vendors. It just took time to pay off.
I contributed a small amount to Scott Walker recently to help pay off his debt. That's how this works.
Where in the world is it OK to take six years to pay off your vendors when all she had to do was lend her campaign the money to pay them and then she could collect it back through our usual system of graft. Why is it OK to force the vendors to be her banker? Dirtbag fits.
-
Where in the world is it OK to take six years to pay off your vendors when all she had to do was lend her campaign the money to pay them and then she could collect it back through our usual system of graft. Why is it OK to force the vendors to be her banker? Dirtbag fits.
If what she's doing is within the law then what is the problem, other than moral?
-
If what she's doing is within the law then what is the problem, other than moral?
You are ok with her being just like the doormat?
-
You are ok with her being just like the doormat?
And like virtually ever other politician that has had to fund raise to run a campaign.
Besides, who "forced" those vendors to provide services or extend credit? "Slow pay" is a cost of doing business in many industries, and is compensated for through higher rates.
I wonder if those campaign debts are accruing interest, and maybe even penalties until paid.
-
You are ok with her being just like the doormat?
She's a big girl and can do what she wants, as long as it's within the laws I'm good.
-
Where in the world is it OK to take six years to pay off your vendors when all she had to do was lend her campaign the money to pay them and then she could collect it back through our usual system of graft. Why is it OK to force the vendors to be her banker? Dirtbag fits.
It really depends on the arraignment she has/had with the vendor(s). If the vendor(s) are fine with the arraignment why should it matter to anyone else?
-
It only matters when a progressive is attacking a republican. When the shoe is on the other foot, the progressives look the other way and accuse everyone who doesn't of the war on women to keep from evenly applying their many many standards.
-
If what she's doing is within the law then what is the problem, other than moral?
Just moral or perhaps civil, as in breach of contract.
-
Just moral or perhaps civil, as in breach of contract.
So, you know the terms of her contracts?
-
Just moral or perhaps civil, as in breach of contract.
Refer to reply #9
-
As a vendor in the Political world I will tell ya exactly how it works...no vendor has a contract that says it will take 6 tears to be paid but when you work in politics is a chance you knowingly take that the campaign may sink in debt . In the 2012 election it took all the way till March 2013 to be paid in full for us.
You can scream and holler all you want and slap them with law suits...but you can not get blood from a turnip and often times reputation is more valuable than collecting a debt owed. It is a small circle and if you cross that line of taking a feud public that becomes well know in the industry. You have to decide what is more important...collecting a debt or negative reputation.
Luckily so far this cycle we have been paid up even with some epic failures!
..and the dirtbag description is accurate!
-
As a vendor in the Political world I will tell ya exactly how it works...no vendor has a contract that says it will take 6 tears to be paid ...
hahahahahahaha
-
As a vendor in the Political world I will tell ya exactly how it works...no vendor has a contract that says it will take 6 tears to be paid but when you work in politics is a chance you knowingly take that the campaign may sink in debt . In the 2012 election it took all the way till March 2013 to be paid in full for us.
You can scream and holler all you want and slap them with law suits...but you can not get blood from a turnip and often times reputation is more valuable than collecting a debt owed. It is a small circle and if you cross that line of taking a feud public that becomes well know in the industry. You have to decide what is more important...collecting a debt or negative reputation.
Luckily so far this cycle we have been paid up even with some epic failures!
..and the dirtbag description is accurate!
Then why take the risk? Does it pay well enough to offset the high chance of delayed payments, or even default?
-
Then why take the risk? Does it pay well enough to offset the high chance of delayed payments, or even default?
wait, the vendors didn't have a choice, did they?
-
wait, the vendors didn't have a choice, did they?
Well, in this day and age; who knows? Unless the vendors were LGBT or Muslim, they may not have had a choice. But at least they should have been able to set their rates at a point where the risk/reward was sufficient.
-
Then why take the risk? Does it pay well enough to offset the high chance of delayed payments, or even default?
I'm sure on the net it makes lots of money.
-
Then why take the risk? Does it pay well enough to offset the high chance of delayed payments, or even default?
There are MANY vendors that will steer clear of politics for that very reason.
I certainly can be worth the risk if you wind up on a winning campaign or even in the top two of many races, but you have to put in the ground work early on to build those relationship and that is where the highest risk lies.
In the Presidential Election this year, both campaigns are projected to spend a BILLION dollars each. Politics is recession proof because it is the one area in America where individuals can still buy influence and access to power.
-
So, you know the terms of her contracts?
What is it about the word "perhaps" that you don't understand?
-
Regardless of whether a vendor takes a risk, if you can pay your debts you should. Credit card companies also expect not to collect 100%, but we still do not celebrate deadbeats. Though I guess if you are a Conservative, rich, deadbeat, it is OK.
-
Is the money owed by the candidate personally, or the campaign as an organization? I think it makes a difference, if someone is going to be called a deadbeat.
-
Is the money owed by the candidate personally, or the campaign as an organization? I think it makes a difference, if someone is going to be called a deadbeat.
details details details.
-
Is the money owed by the candidate personally, or the campaign as an organization? I think it makes a difference, if someone is going to be called a deadbeat.
Legally the campaigns are like corporations and a separate legal entity than the individual.
But in reality it is just semantics from a perception standpoint.
Just like technically Donal Trump is correct that HE has never been bankrupt...just many of his businesses. But he is at the helm.