NEG ATTACK AD 2

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5/18 age of trump</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">see dark money, outside donors (out of state)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">includes online ads (tho there is sep cat, also dark posts)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">swift boat ads sleazy (guys who did not serve, accusations vague) big spend in Ohio (tho b2 had won before)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">hist egs</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/oct/12/trump-dangerous-clinton-mirrors-the-most-shocking-presidential-attack-ads-ever-aired">https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/oct/12/trump-dangerous-clinton-mirrors-the-most-shocking-presidential-attack-ads-ever-aired</a></font></div><div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">AHA&nbsp; note&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">// direct mail&nbsp; dark posts neg ads</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ref</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Pharmaceutical industry likely to shatter its lobbying record as it works to shape Democrats’ spending bill</b></div><div><b>A years-long battle over prescription drug prices reaches its apex as the industry spends tens of millions to alter the plan.</b></div><div>
</div><div>By Yeganeh Torbati and Jonathan O'Connell&nbsp;</div><div><b>November 5, 2021&nbsp;</b></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><b>In September, Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) began noticing mailers arriving at homes across his district, including his own and that of his parents, with an alarming message. The mailers alleged that Kim was intent on preventing Medicare patients from getting the drugs they needed.</b></div><div>
</div><div>That was news to Kim, who has made lowering seniors’ health-care costs and expanding their access to Medicare a signature issue. The mailer, along with a slew of digital ads and text messages, was sponsored by a group called A Healthy Future, LLC, and claimed that Kim and other New Jersey Democrats wanted to cut off “access to lifesaving medicines” and shift Medicare money into other social safety-net programs.</div><div>
</div><div>Soon after the mailers landed in New Jersey mailboxes, Kim’s office began receiving calls from puzzled constituents.</div><div>
</div><div><b>“I’ve been attacked before, but I’ve never seen one as egregious as this one in terms of ‘Andy Kim’s trying to cut Medicare</b>,’” Kim said. “That’s just so absurd, and I actually think that has affected how the district has responded.”</div><div>
</div><div>Watershed or watered down? Democrats’ drug pricing deal leaves many unsatisfied.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Kim was certain the attacks were coming from the pharmaceutical industry, but it was hard for him to be sure. A Healthy Future’s website includes no contact information, and a message to its Facebook page went unanswered. But a nonprofit group called&nbsp;<b>A Public Voice listed A Healthy Future&nbsp;</b>as being under its control in its 2018 and 2019 tax filings and described the LLC’s primary activity as “supporting a vibrant health care system.”</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A Healthy Future and its anonymous funders, it turned out, had fought previous efforts in Washington to reduce the cost of prescription drugs. According to Google digital ad data, A Healthy Future also paid for ads in fall 2020 arguing against a Trump administration attempt to address prescription drug costs.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Brian Newell, a spokesman for PhRMA, the pharmaceutical industry’s chief lobbying arm, when asked whether the organization had ever had any financial or other relationship with A Healthy Future or A Public Voice, said: “Like most industries and associations, PhRMA engages with groups and organizations that have a wide array of opinions and priorities, including those who do not want the government to come between patients and their medicines.” DENIAL NON-DENIAL ~ WATERGATE b&wOODWARD</span></div><div>
</div><div>The ads targeting Kim and others were one strand of a massive, months-long advertising, lobbying and political donation blitz undertaken by the pharmaceutical industry and its allies, perhaps the strongest of all corporate voices in Washington, to kill a Democratic proposal to lower the cost of prescription drugs by empowering the federal government to negotiate their prices.</div><div>
</div><div><b>That provision to control drug prices became a focal point of the $1.75 trillion spending package Democrats are trying to move through Washington.</b>&nbsp;The measure was in, then out, then watered down, going through a fierce ping-pong of backroom negotiations that is likely to continue once the Senate considers the bill in coming weeks.</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Pharmaceutical industry lobbyists defended their effort, alleging that the Democrats’ proposal would stifle research. They also said many other groups poured millions of dollars into the other side of the debate.</span></div><div>
</div><div>“As we’ve said repeatedly, our advocacy has focused on delivering solutions that will lower what patients pay out of pocket for prescription medicines, while opposing reforms that would ultimately leave patients trapped in a broken insurance system, restrict access to lifesaving medicines, and destroy the development of new treatments,” Newell said.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The influence campaign at times worked through groups whose funding sources are hidden. At least 20 different advertisements were run on television and online across the country. The advertisements were augmented by a campaign by<b>&nbsp;PhRMA, which spent nearly $23 million on lobbying through the first nine months of 2021, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets, which tracks corporate spending and political influence. That puts PhRMA on track this year to beat its own spending recording of $29.3 million in 2019.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“The intensity right now of&nbsp;<b>K Street</b>&nbsp;and the deployment of lobbying and dark money is extraordinary,” said Nick Penniman, chief executive of Issue One, which advocates for transparency in Washington. “It is a frenzied state right now.”</span></div><div>
</div><div>The intense effort is reflective of just how much many companies have at stake in the Democrats’ evolving tax-and-spending bill. This article, which is based on interviews, documents and lobbying and ad spending data, offers a window into the efforts one sector took to shape the bill, much of which was crafted in secret.</div><div>
</div><div>The drug pricing provision agreed to by House Democrats this week does not go as far as many Democrats including Kim had hoped. But it still delivers reforms that could cut costs for millions of Americans by<b>&nbsp;capping out-of-pocket spending for seniors at $2,000 a year, capping insulin costs, preventing price increases that exceed the rate of inflation, and allowing Medicare to begin negotiating prices for some drugs.</b></div><div>
</div><div>“What we’re trying to do is defying one of the most powerful special-interest lobby groups in Washington, D.C.,” Kim said. “The fact that we were able to get something that will meaningfully help people was important.”</div><div>
</div><div>Other industries, including tobacco and electric vehicles, have worked aggressively to pare down or reshape parts of the bill in their favor, too. But the effort to fight back on drug-price increases stands out because of the enormous scope of the campaign waged by the pharmaceutical industry and its allies, which have derailed similar proposals for the past two decades, despite how popular many of the changes are with voters, according to polling data.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“They’re the Goliath,” said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of OpenSecrets. She said that aside from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, of which pharmaceutical firms are members, the industry had spent more than any other by a wide margin so far this year, deploying so many lobbyists — 1,600 — that they outnumber members of Congress 3 to 1.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The industry made $90.6 million of political contributions during the 2020 election cycle, according to OpenSecrets,<b>&nbsp;61 percent of that to Democratic candidates and groups.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div><b>The industry’s focus on drug pricing has increased dramatically in recent years as the issue became more top-of-mind for voters. In 2012, lobbyists registered to work on the issue of “drug prices” 69 times for 20 different clients. In 2021 so far, they have filed to lobby on the issue 1,192 times for 242 different clients</b>, according to OpenSecrets data.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">While the industry lobbies on many different issues in a given year, the Democratic bill H.R. 3 that would have given the government more expansive power to negotiate drug prices was the bill PhRMA cited most often for lobbying; the bill appeared in its reports 35 times so far this year,</span>&nbsp;OpenSecrets found.</div><div>
</div><div>Research by Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, which advocates for lower prices, found that PhRMA and its allies spent at least $26.5 million on television and digital ads attacking proposals on price negotiations between July and early November.&nbsp;<b>That included $2.7 million spent by PhRMA, but also $4.5 million in ads by the 60 Plus Association,</b>&nbsp;which bills itself as a conservative version of AARP and<b>&nbsp;did not respond to a request for comment.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Also lining up behind the effort was th<b>e American Action Network,&nbsp;</b>a major conservative nonprofit advocacy group, with $7.9 million in ads. PhRMA gave the American Action Network $4.5 million in 2019, along with $75,000 to the 60 Plus Association, according to tax filings.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) holds one of Congress’s most competitive seats,</b>&nbsp;having wrested it from Republican control in 2018 and narrowly winning reelection in 2020. She shaped her campaign around a platform of tackling rising health-care costs and has maintained focus on that issue, inviting a Type 1 diabetes patient with sky-high insulin costs to be her guest at the 2020 State of the Union address.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">According to data tracked by Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, the American Action Network funded an ad in Slotkin’s district starting in August that accuses Democrats of pushing a&nbsp;<b>“socialist&nbsp;</b>health-care plan to control what medicines you can get.”</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</span></div><div>Her office is now accustomed to fielding calls from constituents who see ads like that one on television, Slotkin said.</div><div>
</div><div>“We can really tell the first couple of days those ads run because that’s when we’ll see a spike in the number of people calling our office,” she said. “We literally write a response that our staff can use to forcefully push back and try to contradict the purposeful misinformation.”</div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Asked about the accuracy of the advertisement targeting Slotkin, American Action Network spokesman Calvin Moore reiterated its message, saying such proposals amount to “socialist price controls” that could limit development of new prescription drugs. “Stifling innovation to this degree has profound consequences,”</b>&nbsp;Moore said.</div><div>
</div><div>Many of the backers of these efforts are difficult to identify because of rules allowing anonymous funding of political groups. A Public Voice, which described itself on its 2018 and 2019 tax forms as the “direct controlling entity” of&nbsp;<b>A Healthy Future, is based in Thornville, Ohio.&nbsp;</b>It listed nearly $5 million in contributions in 2018, though it declined to name its donors, and spent the money on consulting, marketing and funding conservative causes across the country. That year, its donations included $240,000 to&nbsp;<b>Fund for a Working Congress, a political action committee that supported Republican candidates, and $370,000 to Ohio First PAC, which supported a challenge by Republican James B. Renacci against Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).</b></div><div>
</div><div>A voice mail left at a number listed on tax filings for A Public Voice received no response. Documents filed with the state of Ohio show that the e<b>ntity originally formed in 2012 as Protect Your Vote Ohio and show its registered agents as lawyers with Langdon Law, a Cincinnati-area law firm known as a nexus for “dark money” groups on the right.</b></div><div>
</div><div>David Langdon of Langdon Law did not respond to an email and voice mail requesting comment.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The approximately 20 digital and television video ads compiled by Patients for Affordable Drugs Now and reviewed by The Washington Post warned viewers about an array of crises that could befall them should Congress allow Medicare to negotiate prices for drugs, among them that the industry could no longer develop new medications, that the government would limit access to prescriptions, that Medicare would be cut or that millions of jobs would be lost.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“They call it negotiation, but it really means government decides what medicines I can get,” says “Sue,” a<b>&nbsp;woman labeled in one ad as a diabetic from Ohio.</b></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">“Imagine a future in which a vaccine for covid-19 was never discovered,” says a voice in another spot.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Pro-industry advertising ran during opinion shows on Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, as well as during college football games, according to the advertising data firm iSpot</b>.tv.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Once the drug cost proposal was added to President Biden’s larger legislative package, some advertising took direct aim at Democrats’ spending priorities. One claimed the proposal called for “gutting Medicare” in exchange for “pie-in-the-sky special-interest kickbacks.” It depicts House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) riding atop an animated unicorn, she and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) sliding down rainbows, and Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) at a dessert buffet. Another depicts the proposal as a shell game that “loots Medicare.”</span></div><div>
</div><div>Jayapal says Democrats almost have the votes to pass Build Back Better</div><div>Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) described her frustration with lengthy negotiations on the Build Back Better act in an interview with The Washington Post Nov. 5. (Zach Purser Brown/The Washington Post)</div><div><b>Previous presidents, including Barack Obama and Donald Trump, vowed to pass bills to lower prescription drug costs, only to see their efforts die on Capitol Hill, in part because of a relentless lobbying blitz.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>When Montana’s Brian Schweitzer</b>&nbsp;ran for Senate in 1999, he elevated his long-shot campaign by busing senior citizens to Canada so they could illegally buy drugs at lower prices.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">He got his first taste of the pharmaceutical lobby shortly afterward, when he said television ads started attacking him for trusting medicines made in other countries. He said in his case, the attacks helped make his political career. “Virtually everybody in America has a friend or family member who is taking that expensive medicine,” he said.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.)</b>&nbsp;holds another<b>&nbsp;competitive seat, representing an Allentown, Pa.</b>, district that narrowly favored Biden in the 2020 election. She said that as she began supporting drug price reform early in her career, lobbyists began relentlessly calling her office, even though she had vowed not to take corporate PAC donations.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“If they’re calling me nonstop, imagine what they’re doing to those who actually do take their money,” she said.</span></div><div>
</div><div>During the most recent negotiations, Wild began receiving&nbsp;<b>automated emails from constituents&nbsp;</b>worried they wouldn’t be able to get their medicines if the government could negotiate prices.&nbsp;<b>But on Sunday she joined 14 colleagues from other competitive districts, including Kim and Slotkin, to urge Democratic leadership to deliver on their promise to reduce drug prices.</b></div><div>
</div><div>She said she knows what comes next.</div><div>
</div><div>“I am quite certain that because I have been so outspoken on this issue, that I am going to face an attack ad,” Wild said. “<b>I have an idea for what it could be, but I don’t want to tell you in case they see it. I don’t want to give them any ideas.”</b></div></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">----</font></div></div></div><div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">921</font></p><h1 class="widgetheadline h1" style="margin: 25px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; cursor: pointer; overflow-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="widgetheadline-text custom-post-headline" href="https://www.alternet.org/2021/09/a-scathing-ad-slamming-greg-abbott-was-pulled-from-football-broadcast-at-the-last-minute/" aria-label="A scathing ad slamming Greg Abbott was pulled from football broadcast at the last minute: report" data-type="text" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; word-break: break-word; outline: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 25px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">&nbsp;scathing ad slamming Greg Abbott was pulled from football broadcast at the last minute: report</font></a></h1><div class="social-author clearfix" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="social-author__name" href="https://www.alternet.org/author/alex-henderson" data-type="text" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; overflow-wrap: break-word; line-height: 1.4; display: inline; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Alex Henderson</font></a></div><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body css-listicle-body-2655063754" style="margin-top: 10px; -webkit-box-orient: vertical; margin-bottom: 15px; display: -webkit-box; text-overflow: ellipsis; line-height: 23px; -webkit-line-clamp: 3; overflow: hidden; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description"><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On Saturday, September 18, a scathing Lincoln Project ad attacking Texas Gov. Greg Abbott was scheduled to air during ESPN's broadcast of a football game between the University...</font></p></div></div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p></div><div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"dark posts"? disinfo?</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/experts-warned-facebooks-ad-bans-wouldnt-stop-election-misinformation-they-were-right">https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/experts-warned-facebooks-ad-bans-wouldnt-stop-election-misinformation-they-were-right</a></font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">
</div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/mark-zuckerberg-testified-facebook-performed-well-during-2020-election-media-matters-has">https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/mark-zuckerberg-testified-facebook-performed-well-during-2020-election-media-matters-has</a></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">1120</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/trumps-campaign-files-frivolous-lawsuit-against-tv-station-for-airing-attack-ad-slamming-his-coronavirus-response"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/trumps-campaign-files-frivolous-lawsuit-against-tv-station-for-airing-attack-ad-slamming-his-coronavirus-response</font></a></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" /><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no lnx</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Trump campaign sues Wisconsin TV station over ad using his words on coronavirus</b></div><div>By Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America - Donald Trump, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52647057</div><div>Written by Alex Henderson April 14, 2020</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">President Donald Trump’s initial response to the coronavirus pandemic has been the subject of various attack ads, including one from the Lincoln Project (a group of Never Trump conservatives that includes attorney George Conway) and one from Priorities USA (a Democratic super PAC). The theme of those ads is that Trump hasfailed to take the coronavirus threat seriously. And in Wisconsin, Trump’s reelection campaign has filed a frivolous lawsuit against WJFW-TV (which airs NBC programming in North-Central Wisconsin) for airing the Priorities USA ad — calling it “false and defamatory,” claiming that the ad takes Trump’s words out of context.</span></div><div>
</div><div>The campaign filed the lawsuit on Monday, April 13 in Price County Circuit Court. The ad by Priorities USA, called “Existential Threat,” depicts a graph and timeline that uses actual statements Trump made in January and February — for example, “This is their new hoax” and “We have it totally under control.” A variety of Trump critics, from liberals and progressives to centrists to Never Trump conservatives, have been using these quotes to tar and feather Trump and demonstrate that he spent months downplaying the severity of coronavirus. But the Trump campaign, in its lawsuit against WJFW-TV, takes issue with the way Trump’s words “the coronavirus” and “this is their new hoax” are used together — arguing that the ad makes it sound like Trump was saying “the coronavirus, this is their new hoax” as a single sentence. However, the intonation in Trump’s voice makes it sound like two different statements made at different times: Trump’s tone of voice is much lower on “the coronavirus” than it is on “This is their new hoax.”</div><div>
</div><div>Law & Crime reporter Jerry Lambe explains, “<b>The tone and deflection of the speech between the first and second phrases is quite different, but the Trump campaign’s lawsuit suggests the text on the screen contains a comma to connect the phrases in a way which suggests they were uttered together.”</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Trump’s “this is their new hoax” assertion was made at a South Carolina rally on February 28. Downplaying the threat that coronavirus posed in the U.S. — even though it had killed thousands of people in China — the president argued that Democrats were using coronavirus as a “hoax” just as they had used impeachment and the Ukraine scandal as a “hoax.”&nbsp;</span>Trump’s campaign is claiming that he was saying that Democrats were perpetrating a hoax, not that coronavirus itself was a hoax. But clearly, Trump was downplaying coronavirus’ severity and the threat that it posed in the U.S. — where, according to John Hopkins University in Baltimore and CNN’s coronavirus/Hopkins page, it had killed more than 23,600 people as of Tuesday morning, April 14.</div><div>
</div><div>In the lawsuit, Trump’s campaign argues that “Trump’s actual remarks demonstrate that he was specifically referring to the Democrats’ politicization of the coronavirus pandemic when he used the word ‘hoax.’”</div><div>
</div><div>Lambe also points out that although the lawsuit “refers to the defendant as WJFW-NBC,” it “is formally filed against Northland Television, LLC, the corporate owner of the local affiliate. The affiliate is not owned by NBC but broadcasts the network’s programming.”</div><div>
</div><div>The Lincoln Project’s attack ad, titled “Distraction,” is equally scathing. In that ad, anti-Trump conservatives tear apart the absurd claim that Trump, in January and February, was distracted from coronavirus because of his impeachment. That ad argues that when the World Health Organization (WHO) was warning that coronavirus was a “global health emergency,” Trump was too busy with “campaign rallies and golfing” to seriously address the crisis:</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Priorities USA has released an official response to the Wisconsin lawsuit, asserting, “This is pretty simple: Donald Trump doesn’t want voters to hear the truth, and he’s trying to bully TV stations into submission. The truth is that Trump ignored warnings from experts and his own team and downplayed the coronavirus even as it spread unchecked across the country and the world. Americans are now suffering as a result of his inaction. We will never stop airing the facts and holding the president accountable for his actions.”</div><div>
</div><div>
</div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/youre-better-off-lighting-your-money-on-fire-than-giving-it-to-politicians-to-spend-on-tv-ads-heres-why/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/youre-better-off-lighting-your-money-on-fire-than-giving-it-to-politicians-to-spend-on-tv-ads-heres-why/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">You’re better off lighting your money on fire than giving it to politicians to spend on TV ads — here’s why</font></b></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Written by Liberty Vittert, The Conversation<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>September 8, 2019</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Liberty Vittert, Washington University in St Louis</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Alright, you want to make this country a better place for yourself, your children and the many generations to come. So you make a donation to a political candidate you believe will fight for a better country.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But, in reality, you are wasting your money. Here’s why.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Television has long been the golden goose of political advertising. The conventional wisdom is that the candidate who can spend the most on it will most likely win.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">With the exception of Donald Trump, almost every person elected president since 1960 has raised and spent more money than their opponent. That includes Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Obama – with a significant amount of that money being used to buy expensive television advertisements.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In 2016, Hillary Clinton raised over US$1.1 billion, as opposed to Trump’s grand total of less than $650 million. She outspent Trump almost three times over on television advertising.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">So how is it that a presidential candidate won with less money raised and spent?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Spending where it counts</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some have attributed this to free media Trump received from television networks hungry for ratings. But, in many ways, that argument doesn’t hold water, so consider a different answer: digital advertising.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">While he was outspent on TV, Trump spent four times the amount Hillary Clinton did on digital ads, which are any ad on a computer rather than the typical campaign ads on TV, mail or billboards.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Why would this be the answer?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As of 2016, a new era of politics has been established (arguably initiated by Obama in 2008), dominated by digital advertising. And no one has done it better than Donald Trump.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The wasted dollars of TV advertising</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A typical House candidate will spend 65% to 70% of their entire political budget on TV and U.S. mail advertising.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">When one of them advertises on TV, almost 80% of the money spent on the ads is spent broadcasting those ads to people who don’t vote or live in that candidate’s district. That’s because TV does not allow you to target your audience to the same precise level as digital can. This is true from major metro TV markets to rural states.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So if you give to a political campaign, then over 50% of your money is</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">being spent on TV ads that do not reach people who can vote for your candidate.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">What’s more, if you take into account what is spent on further advertising, it turns out that for every dollar you give, only 10 cents actually goes to engaging voters.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In effect, television advertising is the worst thing you can support in terms of impact for your money. ...</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But, if you give to campaigns, both district-level and presidential, that advertise digitally, it is an entirely different story.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Digital advertising targets better</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">When politicians advertise digitally, their advertising can get smarter and more targeted. That’s because the digital advertising acquires more information on individuals and better learns what policies and causes the donor cares about.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">For example, <b>much of Donald Trump’s current Facebook advertising doesn’t even ask for money, it asks for information about you</b>, such as which issues you are interested in and whether you favor building ‘The Wall.’ Here’s a screenshot:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Screenshot from Trump campaign Facebook advertisement.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Facebook</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And here are screenshots from a campaign website that the Facebook ad takes you to, which includes an “Official Secure The Border Survey.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Screenshots, Trump campaign website.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Facebook</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump’s digital ads not only ask for your opinion on a variety of topics, they also assign you a survey number and ask for all the data necessary (name, email, ZIP code, phone number) to target you individually for future voting and fund raising.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is even more valuable than the advertisement itself, because individuals can continually be targeted on topics they specifically care about.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Trump spent 44% of his massive 2016 election media budget on digital advertising. Commercial companies spend 54% of their advertising budgets on digital advertising. But U.S. Senate campaigns only spent 4% to 7% on digital advertising in 2016.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Who do you think is spending more money on figuring out how people are responding to different forms of advertisement?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Now that he’s campaigning for re-election, President Trump is currently running thousands of ads per day on Facebook alone. That’s consistently more than the 23 Democratic candidates challenging Trump combined.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If this trend continues into the general election, it is pretty clear to me who most likely will win.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It seems that the winners will be those who use digital wisely – the losers will be the ones who stick with TV.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[ Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter. ]The Conversation</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Liberty Vittert, Professor of the Practice of Data Science, Washington University in St Louis</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/02/democratic-primary-candidates-targeted-by-sustained-and-ongoing-disinformation-campaign-report/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/02/democratic-primary-candidates-targeted-by-sustained-and-ongoing-disinformation-campaign-report/</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Wednesday, POLITICO&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/20/2020-candidates-social-media-attack-1176018" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">reported</a>&nbsp;that several politicians floated as challengers to President Donald Trump are being targeted by a “sustained and ongoing” propaganda campaign on social media designed to divide the Democratic Party — possibly of foreign origin.</font></p><div class="p1_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The most aggressively targeted figures are Sens. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), all of whom are running for president in 2020, as well as former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX),</b> who is currently&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/19/politics/beto-orourke-2020-president-or-senate/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">deciding</a>&nbsp;between running for president and a second campaign for Senate. All of them are being targeted on Twitter and other platforms, with the apparent goal of damaging their reputations before the primary can begin:</font></p><div class="p2_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="teadsNative" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; position: relative; line-height: 1.7; overflow: hidden; background: rgb(245, 245, 245); border: none !important;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">The cyber propaganda — which frequently picks at the rawest, most sensitive issues in public discourse — is being pushed across a variety of platforms and with a more insidious approach than in the 2016 presidential election, when online attacks designed to polarize and mislead voters first surfaced on a massive scale.</font></p><div class="p3_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" /></blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; position: relative; line-height: 1.7; overflow: hidden; background: rgb(245, 245, 245); border: none !important;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.7;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">Recent posts that have received widespread dissemination include racially inflammatory memes and messaging involving Harris, O’Rourke and Warren. In Warren’s case, a false narrative surfaced alleging that a blackface doll appeared on a kitchen cabinet in the background of the senator’s New Year’s Eve Instagram livestream.</font></p><div class="p4_9" style="font-style: italic; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" /></blockquote><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to information analyzed by Guardians.ai on behalf of POLITICO,<b> much of the activity around these candidates on Twitter is being driven by 200 accounts, both organic and likely automated — during a recent 30 day period, these accounts were responsible for 2 to 15 percent of all mentions of these four politicians on the site.</b></font></p><div class="p5_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The most targeted politician seems to have been Harris, who is currently the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/15/politics/kamala-harris-democratic-frontrunner/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">tentative frontrunner</a>&nbsp;in polls of declared candidates. She has been subject to a barrage of sexist attacks on her youthful relationship with former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">If this activity is part of a disinformation campaign by foreign state actors, it would not be the first time.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> There is strong evidence that Russia</span></span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-election.html" style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" border-box="border-box" outline="outline" none="none" margin="margin" px="px" padding="padding" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" transition="transition" color="color" s="s" ease="ease" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer">created several of the accounts</a><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">&nbsp;</span><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">in 2016 that were responsible for spreading rhetoric meant to divide supporters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, who had very similar platforms but ended up in a toxic primary battle that left Clinton wounded ahead of the general election. Moreover, there is a consensus that the stolen Democratic emails distributed through WikiLeaks and propagandized out of context in the 2016 cycle</span><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">&nbsp;</span><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-the-russians-hacked-the-dnc-and-passed-its-emails-to-wikileaks/2018/07/13/af19a828-86c3-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html" style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" border-box="border-box" outline="outline" none="none" margin="margin" px="px" padding="padding" text-decoration-line="text-decoration-line" transition="transition" color="color" s="s" ease="ease" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer">originated with Russian hackers</a><span style="text-align: center; font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">.</span></span></font></p><div class="p7_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But that is not the whole story, because at least some of the energy to poison the primaries appears to be coming from fringe troll sites like 4chan and 8chan, where users have taken up explicit calls to attack Democratic candidates from the left (one user explicitly told fellow posters to spread information about how Warren was a Republican until 1996). It is unclear how many of these users are foreign state actors from places like Russia or Iran, versus organic right-wing activists in the United States, but data experts believe it is a mixture of the two.</font></p><div class="p8_9" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 17px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.8; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It is clear that social media is still a place where toxic attacks and partisan propaganda can spread rapidly — and those who make it a part of their media diet should be on guard.</font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">willie horton reboot</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><span style="" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Trump tweeted an explicitly racist, anti-immigrant ad Wednesday, less than a week before midterm elections. The new ad features a Mexican man who was convicted of killing two California deputies earlier this year. In the ad, the man smiles and says, “I’m going to kill more cops soon,” as the text on screen reads: “Democrats let him into our country. Democrats let him stay.” The ad also shows apparent crowds of migrants pushing through a gated barrier. The ad has been described as the most racist political ad in three decades, with many denouncing it as fearmongering. Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez slammed the ad, saying it is a sign of Trump’s desperation. The man in the ad was deported twice, under Presidents Clinton and Bush.</font></span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/09/fred-davis-bill-hillsman-political-ads-demon-sheep/">https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/09/fred-davis-bill-hillsman-political-ads-demon-sheep/</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_Sheep">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_Sheep</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In 2010, Carly Fiorina, a businesswoman then best known as the former chief executive officer of&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard" title="Hewlett-Packard" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Hewlett-Packard</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;from 1999 to 2005, entered the race for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate seat then held by Democratic Senator&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Boxer" title="Barbara Boxer" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Barbara Boxer</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. Among her opponents was&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Campbell(California_politician)" title="Tom Campbell (California politician)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Tom Campbell</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, a former congressman who had served five terms in the U.S.&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives" title="United States House of Representatives" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">House of Representatives</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;between 1989 and 2001, representing California's&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California%27s_12th_congressional_district" title="California's 12th congressional district" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">12th</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;and&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California%27s_15th_congressional_district" title="California's 15th congressional district" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">15th</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;congressional districts. Early polling suggested that Campbell held a substantial lead over Fiorina. For a promotional ad opposing Campbell, the Fiorina campaign turned to&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III" title="Fred Davis III" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Fred Davis</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, an advertising executive who had gained notoriety for his 2008 ad depicting then presidential candidate&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama" title="Barack Obama" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Barack Obama</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;as a celebrity akin to&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britney_Spears" title="Britney Spears" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Britney Spears</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;and&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Hilton" title="Paris Hilton" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Paris Hilton</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. The ad, released on Fiorina's campaign website in February 2010, quickly gained international attention.</span><sup id="cite_ref-NPR_1-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_Sheep#cite_note-NPR-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a></sup></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Fred Davis III</b>&nbsp;(born c. 1952<sup id="cite_ref-Barabak_1-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-Barabak-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a></sup>) is a&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party(United_States)" title="Republican Party (United States)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">U.S. Republican Party</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_consultant" title="Media consultant" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">strategy and media consultant</a>&nbsp;who is best known for creating political campaign ads for candidates.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Davis is the oldest of four children. Davis was 19 when his father died; he inherited his father's&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations" title="Public relations" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">public relations</a>&nbsp;firm and left college.<sup id="cite_ref-Barabak_1-1" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-Barabak-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a></sup>&nbsp;In the late 1970s and early '80s, Davis was majority partner in&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa,Oklahoma" title="Tulsa, Oklahoma" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Tulsa, Oklahoma</a>&nbsp;advertising agency Davis & Nauser (with partner Jeffery Nauser), where his client list included just one political candidate, his uncle, then Tulsa mayoral candidate and current U.S. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Senator&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Inhofe" title="Jim Inhofe" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Jim Inhofe</a>&nbsp;(R, Oklahoma).</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Davis left for California when Oklahoma's economy suffered from the collapse of the local oil industry.<sup id="cite_ref-Barabak_1-2" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-Barabak-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a></sup>&nbsp;He founded and leads Strategic Perception, an advertising firm based in&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood" title="Hollywood" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Hollywood</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-Lapowsky_2-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-Lapowsky-2" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[2]</a></sup></font></p><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); font-family: " linux="Linux" libertine="Libertine" georgia="Georgia" times="Times" serif="serif" line-height="line-height"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Work">Work</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fred_Davis_III&action=edit&section=1&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Work" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">He created the&nbsp;<i style="">Celebrity</i>&nbsp;ad for presidential candidate&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain" title="John McCain" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">John McCain</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<i style=""><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_Sheep" title="Demon Sheep" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Demon Sheep</a></i>&nbsp;video for California Senate candidate&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina" title="Carly Fiorina" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Carly Fiorina</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[3]</a></sup>&nbsp;Davis was described as "the most creative person in the business" by Republican media consultant Mark McKinnon.<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration-line: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[4]</a></sup>&nbsp;His political clients have included&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W.Bush" title="George W. Bush" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">President George W. Bush</a>, presidential candidates&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle" title="Dan Quayle" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Dan Quayle</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain" title="John McCain" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">John McCain</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Huntsman_Jr." title="Jon Huntsman Jr." style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Jon Huntsman</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kasich" title="John Kasich" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">John Kasich</a>. Senators&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Inhofe" title="Jim Inhofe" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Jim <b>Inhofe</b></a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cornyn" title="John Cornyn" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">John Cornyn</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamar_Alexander" title="Lamar Alexander" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Lamar Alexander</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain" title="John McCain" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">John McCain</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Flake" title="Jeff Flake" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Jeff Flake</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Corker" title="Bob Corker" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Bob Corker</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Grassley" title="Chuck Grassley" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Chuck Grassley</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Perdue" title="David Perdue" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">David Perdue</a>, John Kennedy,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Sasse" title="Ben Sasse" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Ben Sasse</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Dole" title="Elizabeth Dole" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Elizabeth Dole</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Coverdell" title="Paul Coverdell" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Paul Coverdell</a>. Also <b>governors&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Perdue" title="Sonny Perdue" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Sonny Perdue</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Snyder" title="Rick Snyder" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Rick Snyder</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger" title="Arnold Schwarzenegger" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Arnold Schwarzenegger</a></b>, and&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_Fletcher" title="Ernie Fletcher" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Ernie Fletcher</a>.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">His long-shot gubernatorial campaign for&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Perdue" title="Sonny Perdue" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Sonny Perdue</a>&nbsp;in Georgia featured a video of a giant Rat rampaging Georgia. The rat portrayed the current, popular governor&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Barnes" title="Roy Barnes" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Roy Barnes</a>. The video is credited as starting the movement toward viral videos in politics. Perdue beat Barnes handily, in spite of being outspent more than seven to one.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A similar campaign for now-Governor&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Snyder" title="Rick Snyder" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Rick Snyder</a>&nbsp;of Michigan</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> featured the unusual Davis slogan, “One Tough Nerd.” The slogan caught on across the state helping propel the unknown Snyder past several statewide office holders into a primary win without a runoff, then the general election.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">He created a well-known 2010 ad for&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Delaware,2010" title="United States Senate special election in Delaware, 2010" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">U.S. Senate candidate</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_O%27Donnell" title="Christine O'Donnell" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Christine O'Donnell</a>&nbsp;which featured her declaring she was "not a witch"</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, in response to the re-airing of past statements made by her about her interactions with non-Christian religious practices.</span><sup id="cite_ref-McGreal2010-09-20_5-0" class="reference" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-McGreal2010-09-20-5" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[5]</a></sup><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;O’Donnell’s witch statements had become a staple of late night comedy programs, including Saturday Night Live, before Davis was hired.</span><sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[6]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In February 2012, Davis authored a controversial ad for Representative&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Hoekstra" title="Pete Hoekstra" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Pete Hoekstra</a>&nbsp;for his Senate campaign against incumbent Democrat&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Stabenow" title="Debbie Stabenow" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Debbie Stabenow</a>. The ad attacked Stabenow as Debbie "Spend-it-now" and showed an Asian woman riding a bicycle in a rice paddy thanking Stabenow (in broken English) for enriching the Chinese economy at the expense of the U.S.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Republican strategist&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Murphy(political_consultant)" title="Mike Murphy (political consultant)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Mike Murphy</a>&nbsp;tweeted that the ad was "really, really dumb,"<sup id="cite_ref-hill_9-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-hill-9" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[9]</a></sup>&nbsp;while Stabenow called it "shocking" and "nasty."<sup id="cite_ref-10" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-10" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[10]</a></sup>&nbsp;Hoekstra denied that the ad was insensitive to Chinese Americans and was meant to focus on Stabenow's voting record.<sup id="cite_ref-hill_9-1" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-hill-9" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[9]</a></sup>&nbsp;Within two weeks, the Hoekstra campaign removed the video from his campaign website and&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube" title="YouTube" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">YouTube</a>&nbsp;account.<sup id="cite_ref-11" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-11" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[11]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In 2012, Davis’ firm prepared a 57-page plan (commissioned by billionaire&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Ricketts" title="Joe Ricketts" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Joe Ricketts</a>)</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> for a $10 million campaign attempting to defeat the re-election of President Obama. It partially recycled points of criticism against Obama from the 2008 presidential campaign, including his relationship with Obama’s reverend,&nbsp;</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright" title="Jeremiah Wright" style="background: none; text-decoration-line: none;">Jeremiah Wright</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. The proposal, titled,&nbsp;</span><i style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Defeat of Barack Hussein Obama: The Ricketts Plan to End His Spending for Good,</i><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;was initially approved by the Ricketts' Ending Spending Action Fund.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A copy of the proposal document was released by a person unconnected to the ad campaign to&nbsp;<i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times" title="The New York Times" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The New York Times</a></i>, after which it was roundly lambasted in external commentary. Ricketts then disavowed commissioning the plan. Although Davis' agency had gone at least as far as contacting&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Elder" title="Larry Elder" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Larry Elder</a>&nbsp;to join the project, no ads were ever aired. Ricketts issued a statement disavowing the ad campaign hours after it was publicized by the&nbsp;<i>New York Times.</i></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Other clients of Davis include&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W.Bush" title="George W. Bush" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">George W. Bush</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger" title="Arnold Schwarzenegger" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Arnold Schwarzenegger</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-Lapowsky_2-1" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Davis_III#cite_note-Lapowsky-2" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[2]</a></sup></font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">guard uk</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;Donald Trump’s new ad campaign may be Dangerous – but he’s far from the first to court controversy.&nbsp;</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div>They may be seen more on YouTube than conventional television these days, but a presidential campaign advertisement can still scandalise, distill a message like little else, and even swing an election. Donald Trump’s latest, Dangerous, is already stoking outrage with its signature offensive of innuendo and untruth, but he’s hardly the first to court controversy. How do some of the most notorious campaign ads in history stack up against it?</div><div>
</div><div>Dangerous (2016)</div><div>
</div><div>An unusual candidate in every respect, Trump has long favoured Twitter and the use of his celebrity to leverage free TV coverage over traditional campaign ads. The latter tend to play like an intro to his benighted Celebrity Apprentice: stolid, explicit and exhausting.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> Dangerous lists the external threats to American security (the Middle East, North Korea and Islamic State but no Russia, naturally), then accuses Clinton of lacking fortitude with footage of her recent public faint and of her coughing.</span> Having praised her as a “fighter” in Sunday’s TV debate, Trump neatly encapsulates his contradictory and very loud campaign.</div><div>
</div><div>Daisy Girl (1964)</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Girl counts petals picked from a flower. Nuclear countdown interrupts. The world ends. Without even naming his opponent, Lyndon B Johnson characterised Barry Goldwater as a loose cannon with views on nuclear weapons that would now be described as “intensely relaxed”, even “Trump-esque”. Only broadcast once but exhaustively analysed on the news, it brought political advertising into the modern age. As devastating a minute of television as has ever aired.</div><div>
</div><div>Willie Horton (1988)</div><div>
</div><div>This ugly affair from George Bush Sr built on his equally infamous Revolving Door advert, alerting voters to a murderer who committed rape while on a weekend pass from prison in the state of his opponent Michael Dukakis, who advocated the rehabilitation of criminals. It laid waste to the Democrat’s law and order policies, but no less significant was its use of the dog whistle over the bullhorn when it came to racial politics: Horton was black, and his name was William, not Willie.&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>Mirrors (2016)</div><div>
</div><div>Over plaintive piano and a slurry of Trump misogyny, a group of young girls comb their hair before a question is posed. “Is this the president we want for our daughters?” It may not be especially subtle or even very smart, but compared to Dangerous, Clinton’s ad is Bergman-esque – and its message impossible to deny.</div><div>
</div><div>Convention (1968)</div><div>
</div><div>The ultimate bad trip from the year the hippy dream started to sour. Blaming the well-meaning but ineffectual Hubert Humphrey for countercultural chaos, Vietnam and nationwide poverty, Richard Nixon appealed successfully to his emerging “silent majority”. A sensory onslaught and a masterpiece of distortion, in every sense.</div><div>
</div><div>Any Questions? (2004)</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As Dubya learned from his old man, sling enough mud and some of it will stick. Any Questions? wasn’t an official ad, but was tacitly endorsed by Bush and adopted the style of a stirring war homily (think Band of Brothers: the Documentary) as a group of Vietnam vets smeared John Kerry’s war record. It later transpired that none of them had served alongside him, and Bush was of course a draft dodger, but the damage was done.</span></div><div>
</div><div>The Bear (1984)</div><div>
</div><div>In sharp contrast to the pro-Reagan hymn Prouder, Stronger, Better, this ingenious, insidious ad paired a pulsing soundtrack with sinister, ambiguous images of a grizzly wandering around the woods. The implicit Soviet imagery was clear enough, but it pressed home Reagan’s message of peace through strength without screaming about it. And the last line – “isn’t it smart to be as strong as the bear, if there is a bear?” – was a killer conversation-starter.</div><div>
</div><div>South (1976)</div><div>
</div><div>After the paranoid and unscrupulous Nixon era, Georgian peanut farmer Jimmy Carter cast himself carefully as a man of the people. From the banjo-picking soundtrack to the bucolic backdrop, this ad marked a refreshing return to straightforward, uncynical campaigning and demonstrated the enduring appeal of the outsider, distant from DC horse-trading. Gerald Ford never stood a chance.</div><div>
</div><div>Ike for President (1952)</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This Walt Disney-created effort pairs a catchy tune (“Hang out the banner, beat the drum, we’ll take Ike to Washington”) with irresistibly cute animation – an elephant banging a drum! </span>Babies brandishing balloons! – to create a message so simple it’s virtually meaningless. There’s nothing dull like policy statements here, just feel-good fun to get voters whistling all the way to the ballot box, where they would vote Eisenhower in their droves.</div><div>
</div><div>Kennedy for Me (1960)</div><div>
</div><div>In many ways a continuation of Ike-era innocence, Kennedy for Me allied childish illustrations with a hummable tune, slightly more pointed this time (“a president who’s seasoned through and through, but not so doggone seasoned that he won’t try something new”). This blast of irrepressible optimism buoyed JFK through choppy waters until his murder, which ensured a very different tone for 1964. The age of the attack ad had dawned and political campaigning changed forever.</div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.adweek.com/tv-video/10-iconic-presidential-campaign-ads-changed-political-advertising-172600/">https://www.adweek.com/tv-video/10-iconic-presidential-campaign-ads-changed-political-advertising-172600/</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Presidential campaigns have a history of producing memorable television ads that have helped sway public opinion and win elections. But many of the old rules of campaigning have been broken in 2016's decidedly unusual election season—most often by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who's so far eschewed the idea of producing influential political ads and leaned on free media instead.</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div>Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton, has dominated ad spending so far, swamping the GOP's candidate by a 15-to-1 margin. According to SMG Delta, Clinton and groups supporting her have bought $45 million in ads for the general election, compared with $3 million spent in support of Trump—none of which came from the Trump campaign itself.</div><div>
</div><div>While Trump may not be convinced, Clinton is a firm believer in the power of political advertising on TV, which dates to the medium's earliest days. The most memorable spots (think Reagan’s “Morning in America”) have tended to come from winning campaigns—but not always.</div><div>
</div><div>From inspiring and positive to brutally negative and even, perhaps, unfair, here are 10 of the most iconic presidential spots, from Eisenhower to Obama.</div><div>
</div><div>1</div><div>1952: Eisenhower Answers America</div><div>As TV exploded into the American home following World War II, Dwight D. Eisenhower became the first presidential candidate to effectively use the medium to win the White House. The “Eisenhower Answers America” spots created by Ted Bates and Company were simple—a voter asks a question, and Eisenhower responds, at one point turning from the questioner to the camera.</div><div>
</div><div>The ads were used in 12 key states in the weeks leading up to Election Day and focused on high prices, the Korean War and gridlock in Washington. It was the first time a campaign used short, strategic television ads instead of buying program-length blocks of air time.</div><div>
</div><div>The Museum of the Moving Image, noting the spots were created by Rosser Reeves, whose credits also include M&M’s timeless “Melts in your mouth, not in your hands” campaign, reports Reeves “convinced Eisenhower that spots placed immediately before or after such popular programs as I Love Lucy would reach more viewers, and at a much lower cost, than half-hour speeches.”</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>2</div><div>1964: The “Daisy” Ad</div><div>Perhaps the most famous political ad to ever run on television, Lyndon Johnson’s "Daisy" spot is blunt and unforgettable. It ran just once—on NBC on Sept. 7, 1964, a Monday night—but was later replayed in its entirety on CBS's and ABC's evening newscasts.</div><div>
</div><div>In the ad, which was created by Doyle Dane Bernbach and media consultant Tony Schwartz, a young girl picks the petals off a daisy as an ominous countdown is heard. It ends with a nuclear explosion and mushroom cloud meant to suggest Johnson’s opponent, Barry Goldwater, was too dangerous to be president. “Vote for President Johnson on Nov. 3,” says the somber narrator. “The stakes are too high for you to stay home."</div><div>
</div><div>As The New York Times wrote in its 2008 obituary of Schwartz, the ad “was credited with contributing to Johnson’s landslide victory at the polls in November.”</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>3</div><div>1968: “Laughter”</div><div>Tony Schwartz, who produced the "Daisy" ad, created another memorable spot four years later for Hubert Humphrey, who was running against Richard Nixon and his running mate, Spiro Agnew. In the ad, the camera pulls back slowly as a man laughs harder and harder until the shot reveals a television with "Agnew for Vice President" on the screen. The ad ends with a message: "This would be funny if it weren’t so serious."</div><div>
</div><div>While memorable, the spot fell short of its goal. Nixon and Agnew won 301 Electoral College votes to capture the 1968 presidential election.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>4</div><div>1984: “Morning in America”</div><div>Ronald Reagan, who in 1980 asked voters the effective question “Can we afford four more years?” to dispatch President Jimmy Carter, produced one of the most iconic and positive ads four years later with "Morning in America," which told voters things were finally looking up. "It’s morning again in America," said the narrator. "Today, more Americans will go to work than ever before in our history … under the leadership of President Reagan, our country is prouder, and stronger, and better. Why would we ever want to return to where we were less than four short years ago?”</div><div>
</div><div>The refreshingly optimistic ad helped Reagan get reelected in a landslide, picking up 49 of 50 states to defeat Walter Mondale.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>5</div><div>1988: “Revolving Door”</div><div>Perhaps one of the harshest negative ads in all of presidential politics, the "Revolving Door" ad George H. W. Bush ran against Michael Dukakis is credited with severely damaging Dukakis’ campaign. Showing a revolving door set into a prison wall, the narrator says of Dukakis, "His revolving door prison policy gave weekend furloughs to first-degree murderers not eligible for parole. While out, many committed other crimes, like kidnapping and rape. … Now, Michael Dukakis says he wants to do for America what he’s done for Massachusetts. America can’t afford that risk."</div><div>
</div><div>That line was repeated in another memorable Bush ad, "Tank Ride," which showed images of Dukakis riding around in a tank wearing a helmet with his name on it, as the narrator lists military weapons programs Dukakis opposed.</div><div>
</div><div>After the election, a New York Times survey named "Revolving Door" the single most influential ad of the campaign, particularly among women, many of whom said watching the spot caused them to view Bush as "stronger on crime" and the candidate who would keep them safer.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>6</div><div>2004: “Windsurfing”</div><div>George W. Bush produced this devastating ad against John Kerry by portraying the Democrat as a flip-flopper in an unusually effective way—he showed Kerry windsurfing and constantly changing direction with every change in the wind. "John Kerry. Whichever way the wind blows," the narrator says.</div><div>
</div><div>The ad had the secondary effect of showing Kerry in an unflattering light—not just in a bathing suit, but also as an elitist windsurfer.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>7</div><div>2004: “Sellout”</div><div>Better known as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth spot, this series of attack ads on John Kerry led to a new entry in the political advertising lexicon: swiftboating, a verb now defined by the Oxford dictionary as targeting a politician or public figure "with a campaign of personal attacks."</div><div>
</div><div>The brutal ads featured former Navy colleagues of Kerry—each saying at the start, “I served with John Kerry"—attacking his character, accusing him of lying about his record in Vietnam and being untrustworthy and unfit for the presidency.</div><div>
</div><div>The impact of "Sellout" was amplified by media coverage as the ad dominated the news cycle in August 2004. Polls showed veterans viewed Kerry less favorably following the release of the Swift Boat ads.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>8</div><div>2008: “3 A.M.”</div><div>Hillary Clinton’s primary campaign featured a memorable ad depicting sleeping children in the middle of the night. A phone is ringing, and the narrator asks parents who they want to answer that call at the White House in the event of an international crisis.</div><div>
</div><div>The ad spawned dozens of parodies, including the obligatory SNL skit, and has been used against Clinton since its release, most recently in 2015, when Republican Rand Paul accused Clinton of “missing the 3 a.m. phone call” on Benghazi.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>9</div><div>2008: “Yes, We Can”</div><div>This spot for Barack Obama unveiled yet another new kind of presidential ad—a nearly four-minute spot that combines the candidate’s own words with the singing of pop stars and celebrities. The web spot turns Obama's speech in New Hampshire following the first in the nation primary, into a music video by will.i.am.</div><div>
</div><div>Uploaded in February, the song won an Emmy Award that summer. Describing its impact that year, the Huffington Post wrote the spot was "a perfect example of the types of content that never would have seen the light of day just four years ago—where could you have bought enough TV airtime to air a 4:30 television ad? How could you possibly have gotten enough nationwide exposure to make it possible?" With the widespread availability of broadband internet, people were no longer limited to watching campaign content on TV.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>10</div><div>2012 “47 Percent”</div><div>Four years later, President Obama used a piece of undercover video to deliver a harsh blow to his opponent, Mitt Romney, portraying him as an uncaring elitist.</div><div>
</div><div>Romney had been recorded during a closed-door meeting describing Obama’s supporters as "the 47 percent" of Americans who were "victims" looking for handouts. They "will vote for this president no matter what. … My job is not to worry about those people."</div><div>
</div><div>The "47 percent" joined "Fired Big Bird" and "Binders Full of Women" as memes that dominated the election cycle and harmed Romney's image.</div></div><div><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;=</font></p><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">tool</font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/races/special-elections/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.opensecrets.org/races/special-elections/</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5/4/18</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">t recent filings, current candidates running in House and Senate races nationwide have raised more than&nbsp;<b open="Open" sans="Sans" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">$1 billion</b>&nbsp;in the 2018 cycle with six months still left to go.<br open="Open" sans="Sans" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" /><br open="Open" sans="Sans" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" />157 candidates running for the U.S. Senate have raised an average of&nbsp;<b open="Open" sans="Sans" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">$2.3 million</b>while&nbsp;1519 candidates running for the House of Representatives have raised an average of just under&nbsp;<b open="Open" sans="Sans" helvetica="Helvetica" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">$446 thousand</b>.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ads, heat map</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/ad-data/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.opensecrets.org/ad-data/</a></span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">opensectrets</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Representatives from Twitter, Facebook and Google are expected to testify this week at three congressional hearings on the influence of social media in the 2016 election.<br style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;" /></font></span></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Today’s hearing&nbsp;before the Senate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; text-decoration-line: none;">judiciary committee</a>and tomorrow’s hearings before the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; text-decoration-line: none;">Senate&nbsp;</a>and&nbsp;<a href="https://intelligence.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=814" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; text-decoration-line: none;">House&nbsp;</a>intelligence committees&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">follow the introduction of the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1989/text" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">Honest Ads Act</a>, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/action-center/take-action" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">would require</a>&nbsp;companies, such as Twitter, Facebook and Google, to&nbsp;maintain a public database of online political ads as well as a disclaimer identifying each ad’s&nbsp;</span></span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">sponsor.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">&nbsp;</span></span></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Senate bill was introduced by Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).&nbsp;A companion bill was introduced by Reps. Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.) and Mike Coffman (D-Colo.) in the House.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The bills were filed two weeks after Facebook&nbsp;<a href="https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/09/information-operations-update/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">reported</a>&nbsp;about 470 accounts likely operating from Russia had spent about $100,000 on roughly 3,000 ads from June 2015 to May 2017.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">According to CRP data, all but&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/31/google-facebook-lawmakers-tech-244351" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; text-decoration-line: none;">three</a>&nbsp;members of the three committees have received contributions from Alphabet Inc (Google’s parent company), Facebook and Twitter since 2015. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) received the most from the three companies, with over $124,000 in donations.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b style="">Since 2015, Alphabet alone has contributed around $100,000 to Wyden, the most to any committee member. </b>Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is Facebook’s greatest recipient with over $50,000, while Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) has received $3,000 from Twitter, the most to any committee member. Harris also has received the most from the internet industry overall with over $200,000 in contributions since 2015.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Judiciary chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) received about $60,000 from the three companies, while Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) received about $35,000 and House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. David Nunes (R-Calif.) received roughly $22,000.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Last week, current and former representatives of print, online and broadcast media as well as two nonprofits&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">testified on the House bill before the House Subcommittee on Information Technology.</span></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Allen Dickerson, the legal director for the Institute for Free Speech, said he opposed adding online political ads to existing regulations on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/527s/electioneering.php" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">electioneering communications</a>&nbsp;on the pretext of preventing foreign intervention, which Congress can regulate separately.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Institute for Free Speech (IFS) — known as the Center for Competitive Politics until last week — generally opposes campaign finance transparency on First Amendment grounds. The organization represented the plaintiffs in&nbsp;<i style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><a href="https://transition.fec.gov/law/litigation/speechnow_ac_opinion.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">SpeechNow.org v. FEC</a>,&nbsp;</i>which helped give rise to super PACs. In February, the group&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">unsuccessfully&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.ifs.org/litigation/completed-litigation/independence-institute-v-fec/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">represented</a><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">&nbsp;a think tank that wanted to shield the identities of its ad donors.</span></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">IFS has also advocated for anonymous spending beyond the context of ads. In 2010, the organization (then the Center for Competitive Politics) spent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=F122295&year=2010" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">$40,500</a></span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">&nbsp;lobbying on “general campaign finance issues”&nbsp;including in opposition to the DISCLOSE Act, which would have expanded reporting and disclosure requirements around political ad spending.</span></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">All five&nbsp;Democrats and three of the seven<strong style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">&nbsp;</strong>Republicans on the subcommittee participated in last week’s hearing. The Republicans were Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-Mich.), Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) and chairman Rep. William Hurd (R-Texas). Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) was present but left the dias during opening testimony.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Reps.&nbsp;Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Steve Russell (R-Okla.) and Greg Gianforte (R-Mo.) did not attend the meeting. Mitchell left the two-hour meeting immediately after directing rapid-fire questions at David Chavern, the representative for the News Media Alliance, a news industry organization.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to CRP data, Issa has received more than&nbsp;$95,000&nbsp;from the internet industry since 2015.&nbsp;Farenthold has received over $39,000 from the industry, which has also donated more than $65,000 to Hurd and over $10,500 to&nbsp;Amash.</font></p><div dir="auto" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Connolly has received the most from the internet industry among subcommittee Democrats since 2015, with over $42,000 in donations.&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">Raskin has received over $13,500</span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">&nbsp;while&nbsp;</span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">Krishnamoorthi has received over $10,000.&nbsp;</span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">Robin Kelly (D-IL.) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) have combined to receive more than&nbsp;$10,000.</span></font></div><div dir="auto" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">On the day of the hearing, Twitter announced a&nbsp;new ad&nbsp;<a href="https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/topics/product/2017/New-Transparency-For-Ads-on-Twitter.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">transparency policy</a>&nbsp;that will include public access to the identity of buyers, costs and targeted demographics of electioneering ads.&nbsp;</span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">Three days later, Facebook&nbsp;<a href="https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/10/update-on-our-advertising-transparency-and-authenticity-efforts/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">announced&nbsp;</a></span><span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">its own transparency plans, with similar visibility into current and historical political ad spending.</span></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The internet became a key election battleground with Barack Obama’s&nbsp;<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2015/09/23/take-a-note-from-obamas-campaign-playbook-go-digital-on-political-ad-spending/#44d4fcce79d2" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">unprecedented</a>&nbsp;use of digital advertising in his 2008 presidential campaign, but online political ads are not yet subject to the same disclosure requirements as broadcast ads.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><em style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">Correction:&nbsp;</em></strong><em style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">An earlier version of the story stated Rep. Justin Amash did not attend last week’s hearing of the House Subcommittee on Information Technology. Amash, a member of the subcommittee, left the dias during opening testimony but did attend.&nbsp;</em></font></p><div class="related-box" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; width: 760px; padding: 8px 0px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 12px;"><span class="txt" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; float: left; line-height: 28px; text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: -0.03em; margin-right: 15px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RELATED TOPICS</font></span><ul class="related-list" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px -5px; padding: 0px; list-style: none;"><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/ads/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">ads</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/amy-klobuchar/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Amy Klobuchar</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/center-for-competitive-politics/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Center for Competitive Politics</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/facebook/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">facebook</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/google/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">google</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/honest-ads-act/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Honest Ads Act</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/house-judiciary-committee/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">House Judiciary Committee</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/institute-for-free-speech/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Institute for Free Speech</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/john-mccain/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">John McCain</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/mark-warner/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Mark Warner</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/online-ads/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Online Ads</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/senate-judiciary-committee/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Senate Judiciary Committee</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/trump-russia/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Trump Russia</font></a></li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; margin: 0px 5px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style-position: inside; float: left;"><a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/twitter/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background: rgb(236, 238, 242); text-decoration-line: none; display: block; padding: 5px 11px; border-radius: 3px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">twitter</font></a></li></ul><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">45 comm</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">After the tweet, Joe Ricketts donated another $1 million to Our Principles, and Trump upped the ante. In an interview with The Washington Post’s editorial board, Trump threatened to fund ads attacking the family, telling the public “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/03/21/a-transcript-of-donald-trumps-meeting-with-the-washington-post-editorial-board/?utm_term=.05d9c13a452d" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">what a&nbsp;<b>rotten job they’re doing with the Chicago Cubs</b></a><b>.” (Seven months later, the Cubs won the World Series for the first time in more than 100 years).</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As it became clearer that Trump would become the Republican nominee, both 45-branded groups went largely silent.<b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;But in the final months of the election, Ricketts made good with Trump, took over the groups and rebranded them as pro-Trump vehicles<span style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;">.</span></b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It was at this point that the 45Committee’s role became crucial because as a&nbsp;<b>501(c)(4) social welfare organization,</b>&nbsp;it doesn’t have to disclose its donors. One fundraiser familiar with the Ricketts’ operation put it bluntly to Politico, saying&nbsp;“<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/secret-money-to-boost-trump-228817" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">There is a substantial appetite for a nondisclosing vehicle, because it’s embarrassing to support Trump</a>.”</span></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Together, the two groups spent more than $45.6 million in 2016, 98 percent of which came in the final two months of the election, helping Trump squeak out a historic victory. Nearly half of the total spending,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C90016478&cycle=2016" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">$21.3 million</a>, came from the nominally apolitical 45Committee.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">IRS accounting magic</font></strong></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The new 45Committee tax filing is a case study in how politically active nonprofits spend millions to influence politics, without disclosing their donors, while maintaining the illusion that they are a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The key, when it comes to filing a return with the IRS is not necessarily what a group spends on direct political activity; it’s what it does to make sure that that spending is less than half of its overall outlays.<b>&nbsp;So to avoid raising alarm bells at the IRS, most groups spend heavily on grants to other politically active nonprofits and on “educational” or “issue” ads that have some vague attachment to the group’s stated mission.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The 45Committee did both. It gave out more than $3.6 million in grants to other nonprofits, the largest of which was&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4390422-45Committee-2017-Form-990.html#document/p23/a406987" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">a $2 million grant that went to Secure America Now</a>, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cycle=2016&cmte=C90014176" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">spent $1 million</a>&nbsp;in 2016. It also gave to the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=National+Rifle+Assn&cycle=2016" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">National Rifle Association</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C90013145&cycle=2016" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">U.S. Chamber of Commerce</a>, both of which were very active in the 2016 elections.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">And then there are the ads. While 45Committee only reported $21.3 million to the FEC, the filing shows that it paid $38.3 million&nbsp;—&nbsp;more than<b>&nbsp;84 percent of its overall outlays&nbsp;—&nbsp;to media firms providing “<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4390422-45Committee-2017-Form-990.html" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">media ad services</a>.”</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Aside from ads the group ran in the 2016 election aimed at hobbling Trump’s opponent, 45Committee spent at least&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/45-committee-website-hacked/index.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">$4 million supporting Trump’s cabinet nominees</a>&nbsp;after the election</span>.<b>&nbsp;This is important because it establishes that the group has little-to-no mission beyond supporting Trump in one way or another. It does not have major initiatives beyond running ads, and all of the group’s ads benefit Trump in some way.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">If the IRS were to look at this activity, it may decide that the 45Committee provided excessive benefit to a single person&nbsp;— a big no-no for nonprofits. That person of course is Donald Trump. But for the IRS to rule on something like this, it would have to audit the 45Committee and conduct a “facts and circumstances” analysis of the groups activities, which is a longshot: The IRS only audits seven out of every 1,000 returns it receives from nonprofits every year.</font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">...</font></p></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">mayer on art pope NC:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In the spring of 2010, the conservative political strategist&nbsp;<b>Ed Gillespie</b>&nbsp;flew from Washington, D.C., to Raleigh, North Carolina, to spend a day laying the groundwork for<b>&nbsp;REDMAP,</b></span>&nbsp;a new project aimed at engineering a Republican takeover of state legislatures. Gillespie hoped to help his party get control of statehouses where congressional redistricting was pending, thereby leveraging victories in cheap local races into a means of shifting the balance of power in Washington.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">It was an ingenious plan, and Gillespie is a skilled tactician—he once ran the Republican National Committee—but REDMAP seemed like a long shot in North Carolina. Barack Obama carried the state in 2008 and remained popular. The Republicans hadn’t controlled both houses of the North Carolina General Assembly for more than a century. (“Not since General Sherman,” a state politico joked to me.) That day in Raleigh, though, Gillespie had lunch with an ideal ally: James Arthur (Art) Pope, the chairman and C.E.O. of Variety Wholesalers,</span>&nbsp;a discount-store conglomerate. The Raleigh News and Observer had called Pope, a conservative multimillionaire, the Knight of the Right. The REDMAP project offered Pope a new way to spend his money.</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">That fall, in the remote western corner of the state, John Snow, a retired Democratic judge who had represented the district in the State Senate for three terms, found himself subjected to one political attack after another. Snow, who often voted with the Republicans, was considered one of the most conservative Democrats in the General Assembly, and his record reflected the views of his constituents.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">His Republican opponent, Jim Davis—an orthodontist loosely allied with the Tea Party—had minimal political experience, and Snow, a former college football star, was expected to be reëlected easily. Yet somehow Davis seemed to have almost unlimited money with which to assail Snow.</span></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Snow recalls, “I voted to help build a pier with an aquarium on the coast, as did every other member of the North Carolina House and Senate who voted.” But a television attack ad presented the “luxury pier” as Snow’s wasteful scheme. “We’ve lost jobs,” an actress said in the ad. “John Snow’s solution for our economy? ‘Go fish!’ ” A mass mailing, decorated with a cartoon pig, denounced the pier as one of Snow’s “pork projects.” It criticized Snow for “wasting our tax dollars,” citing his vote to “spend $218,000 on a Shakespeare festival,” but failing to note that this sum represented a budget cut for the program, which had been funded by the legislature since 1999.</span></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><b>In all, Snow says, he was the target of two dozen mass mailings, one of them reminiscent of the Willie Horton ad that became notorious during the 1988 Presidential campaign</b>. It featured a photograph of Henry Lee McCollum, a menacing-looking African-American convict on death row, who, along with three other men, raped and murdered an eleven-year-old girl. After describing McCollum’s crimes in lurid detail, the mailing noted, “Thanks to arrogant State Senator John Snow, McCollum could soon be let off of death row.” Snow, in fact, supported the death penalty and had prosecuted murder cases. But, in 2009, he had helped pass a new state law, the&nbsp;<b>Racial Justice Act, [signed by mccrory, boasted abour in wiki?]</b>that enabled judges to reconsider a death sentence if a convict could prove that the jury’s verdict had been tainted by racism. The law was an attempt to address the overwhelming racial disparity in capital sentences.</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><b>“The attacks just went on and on,” Snow told me recently. “My opponents used fear tactics. I’m a moderate, but they tried to make me look liberal.” On Election Night, he lost by an agonizingly slim margin—fewer than two hundred votes.</b></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">After the election, the North Carolina Free Enterprise Foundation, a nonpartisan, pro-business organization, revealed that two seemingly independent political groups had spent several hundred thousand dollars on ads against Snow—a huge amount in a poor, backwoods district. Art Pope was instrumental in funding and creating both groups,<b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Real Jobs NC and Civitas Action.&nbsp;</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Real Jobs NC was responsible for the “Go fish!” ad and the mass mailing that attacked Snow’s “pork projects.” The racially charged ad was produced by the North Carolina Republican Party, and Pope says that he was not involved in its creation. But Pope and three members of his family gave the Davis campaign a four-thousand-dollar check each—the maximum individual donation allowed by state law.</span></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">Snow, whose defeat was first chronicled by the Institute for Southern Studies, a progressive nonprofit organization, told me, “It’s getting to the point where, in politics, money is the most important thing. They spent nearly a million dollars to win that seat. A lot of it was from corporations and outside groups related to Art Pope. He was their sugar daddy.”</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">Bob Phillips, the head of the North Carolina chapter of&nbsp;<b>Common Cause,</b>&nbsp;an organization that promotes campaign-finance reform, said that Snow’s loss signals a troubling trend in American politics.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“John Snow raised a significant amount of money,” he said. “But it was exceeded by what&nbsp;<b>outside groups</b>&nbsp;spent in that race, mostly on commercials against John Snow.” Such lopsided campaigns will likely become more common, thanks to the Supreme Court, which, in a controversial ruling in January, 2010, struck down limits on corporate campaign spending. For the first time in more than a century, businesses and unions can spend unlimited sums to express support or opposition to candidates.</span></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><b>
</b></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><b>Phillips argues that the Court’s decision, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, has been a “game changer,”&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">especially in the realm of state politics.</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;In swing states like North Carolina—which the Democrats consider so important that they have scheduled their 2012 National Convention there—an individual donor, particularly one with access to corporate funds, can play a significant, and sometimes decisive, role. “We didn’t have that before 2010,” Phillips says. “Citizens United opened up the door. Now a candidate can literally be outspent by independent groups. We saw it in North Carolina, and a lot of the money was traced back to Art Pope.”</span></font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">Though conservatives like Pope took the lead in exploiting the new possibilities for corporate spending, the use of ostensibly nonpartisan advocacy groups has been proliferating on both the left and the right.&nbsp;<b>Fred Wertheimer, who heads Democracy 21, another group that works for campaign-finance reform, says, “Tax-exempt organizations that are supposed to ‘promote the social welfare’</b>&nbsp;are being improperly used by Democratic and Republican supporters alike to engage in extensive campaign activities.” He just filed a complaint about the practice with the Internal Revenue Service. “The disastrous Citizens United decision has opened the door wide to influence-buying,” he says.</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">John Snow was not the only candidate in North Carolina to fall victim to such tactics. In Fayetteville, an hour south of Raleigh,&nbsp;<b>Margaret Dickson</b>, a sixty-one-year-old retired radio broadcaster and media executive who had been married for thirty-one years and had three grown children, was seeking reëlection to the North Carolina State Senate. She’d served seven years in the state’s General Assembly, had the backing of much of the business community, and considered herself a centrist, pro-business Democrat. Then came what she calls “<b>the hooker ad</b>.” Her Republican opponent released an ad suggesting that Dickson was using her seat to promote her personal investments. As Dickson describes it, “They used an actress with dark hair who was fair, like me. She was putting on mascara and red lipstick. She had on a big ring and bracelet.” A narrator intoned “Busted!” and the actress’s hand grabbed what appeared to be a wad of hundred-dollar bills. Dickson says, “The thrust of it was that I am somehow prostituting myself.” Another television ad, paid for by Real Jobs NC, described Dickson as a&nbsp;<b>“Tax Twin” to Nancy Pelosi,</b>&nbsp;saying that there was “not a dime’s worth of difference” between them. (Dickson’s voting record is substantially less liberal than Pelosi’s.) Dickson held a press conference to defend her record, but it was too late: “Those ads hurt me. I’ve been through this four times before, but the tone of this campaign was much uglier, and much more personal, than anything I’ve seen.”</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Variety Wholesalers, Pope’s company, had contributed two hundred thousand dollars to Real Jobs NC. Roger Knight, the group’s executive director, told me that the Citizens United decision made it much easier to raise money, because “it allowed us to direct the fund-raising toward businesses.”</span>&nbsp;He added that Pope provided the fund-raising effort with essential seed money. “Art would provide some of the guidance” on the attack ads, Knight said, and because Pope was on the board “he would approve them.” Pope says that he was dismayed when he saw the “hooker” ad, which was paid for by Dickson’s opponent. But he and three family members gave money to the opponent’s campaign, and Dickson argues that “political contributors make paid advertising possible” and “bear some responsibility.”</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">Dickson’s opponent, meanwhile, was championed by another corporate-backed group with financial ties to Pope, Americans for Prosperity, a national Tea Party group, which spent eleven thousand dollars disseminating its message. In the past decade, Pope and groups affiliated with him have contributed more than two million dollars to Americans for Prosperity. Pope is one of the organization’s four directors. Americans for Prosperity bills itself as an independent, nonpartisan “social welfare” organization. But, that fall in North Carolina, its ads, like those of Real Jobs NC, promoted only Republicans.</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">On Election Night, Dickson fell about a thousand votes short of victory in her district, which has a population of more than a hundred and fifty thousand. “I’ve never met Art Pope,</span>” she says, but she is convinced that “Art Pope was after my seat. It wasn’t personal. They wanted control, and they were willing to say anything and do anything to achieve it.”</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" cursor="cursor" pointer="pointer" display="display" block="block" padding="padding" px="px" outline="outline">That same fall, Chris Heagarty, a Democratic lawyer, ran for a legislative seat in Wake County, which includes Raleigh, where Pope lives. He had previously directed an&nbsp;<b>election-reform group,&nbsp;</b>and was not naïve about political money. Yet even he was caught off guard by the intensity of the effort marshalled against him. Real Jobs NC and Civitas Action spent some seventy thousand dollars on ads portraying him as fiscally profligate, and Americans for Prosperity spent heavily on behalf of his opponent.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;One ad accused him of having voted “to raise taxes over a billion dollars,” even though he had not yet served in the legislature.Another ad depicted Heagarty, who has dark hair and a dark complexion, as Hispanic. (He is Caucasian.) The ad was sponsored by the North Carolina Republican Party, to which Pope had contributed in 2008. Heagarty said, “They slapped a sombrero on a photo of me, and wrote, ‘Mucho Taxo! Adios, Señor!’ ”</span>He said,&nbsp;<b>“If you put all of the Pope groups together, they and the North Carolina G.O.P. spent more to defeat me than the guy who actually won.” He fell silent, then added, “For an individual to have so much power is frightening. The government of North Carolina is for sale.”</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">5/18</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="print-title"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></h1><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.exposedbycmd.org/2018/05/14/unprecedented-outside-spending-floods-wisconsin-attack-us-senator-tammy-baldwin" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.exposedbycmd.org/2018/05/14/unprecedented-outside-spending-floods-wisconsin-attack-us-senator-tammy-baldwin</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>2018 campaign cash is already flooding into races across the country. But nowhere is more awash in money than Wisconsin, where Tammy Baldwin’s U.S. Senate race&nbsp;<a href="http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/unprecedented-outside-spending-hits-tammy-baldwin-boosts-kevin-nicholson-in/article_b57981aa-1f25-5d9c-95d9-1ec727e70d9c.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">has already seen</a>&nbsp;more than twice the amount of the next closest contest.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The spending is “unprecedented”</b>&nbsp;for a U.S. Senate campaign at this stage, says Andrew Mayersohn, a researcher for the Center for Responsive Politics.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As of April 23, 2018, more than $10 million had been spent by conservative groups buying ads opposing Baldwin or supporting one of her two main Republican rivals, management consultant Kevin Nicholson and longtime ALEC legislator and State Senator Leah Vukmir.&nbsp;</span>In contrast,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/races/outside-spending?cycle=2018&id=WIS1&spec=N" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">just over $1 million</a>&nbsp;has been spent supporting Baldwin or attacking her opponents. The PACs and dark money “issue ad” groups trying to unseat Baldwin are connected to some of the most powerful right-wing donors in the country, including Richard Uihlein, Robert Mercer and the billionaire industrialist Koch brothers.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These billionaire backers of the far right are working hard to take down Tammy Baldwin, a pro-labor, pro-environment, pro-universal health care progressive. Below, the Center for Media and Democracy details some of the biggest spenders in the race.</font></p><h2 style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RICHARD UIHLEIN’S AMERICA’S PAC AND RESTORATION PAC</font></h2><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The biggest outside spender in the Wisconsin senate race to date is industrial supply magnate&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Richard_Uihlein" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Richard Uihlein</a>, owner of the shipping supply firm Uihlein Corp. Uihlein single-handedly turned little-known veteran Kevin Nicholson into a major threat to Baldwin’s seat. Uihlein’s “Restoration PAC,” a federal Super PAC, has spent $541,374 against Baldwin and $2,502,268 supporting Nicholson. Uihlein has bankrolled Restoration PAC with&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave2.php?cycle=2018&cmte=C00571588" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">$4,225,000</a>&nbsp;as of February 2018.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">His “America’s PAC” has spent $2,621,565 supporting Nicholson, as well as $703,500 opposing Baldwin. Between September 2017 and February 2018, Uihlein has given America’s PAC&nbsp;<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave2.php?cycle=2018&cmte=C00559906" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">$2.65 million</a>.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But all that money doesn’t translate into common sense. In an embarrassing gaffe, America’s PAC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.thetelegraph.com/news/article/Radio-ad-comparing-Nicholson-to-Missouri-governor-12875264.php" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">sent a radio ad to 20 Wisconsin stations</a>&nbsp;favorably comparing Nicholson with embattled Missouri Governor Eric Greitens. Greitens is facing a criminal trial for initiating an affair with his hairdresser by strapping her arms to exercise hoops, blindfolding her, stripping her and taking a photo to make sure that she wouldn’t tell anyone. What do Greitens and Nicholson have in common? Both are veterans and both were Democrats who are now running for office on the Republican line.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This isn’t the first time that America’s PAC ads have gone awry. In 2014, America’s PAC sponsored ads in Ohio, which observers such as the Black Commentator news site&nbsp;<a href="http://blackcommentator.com/105/105_cover.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">described</a>&nbsp;as “highly obnoxious” for their attempt to portray Democrats as destroying African-American communities through support for pro-choice policies. In 2006,&nbsp;<a href="http://articles.southbendtribune.com/2006-10-03/news/26964263_1_ads-black-voters-rate-among-black-women" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">radio ads</a>&nbsp;prepared by America’s PAC gave “the clear message that black voters need to join the Republican cause if they want to enjoy the same success as whites.”</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">America’s PAC is attacking Baldwin for the death of several veterans at a Veterans Administration (VA) hospital because she allegedly ignored a whistleblower’s warning about “overmedicated veterans.” Politifact&nbsp;<a href="http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/may/05/americas-pac/super-pac-attack-blaming-tammy-baldwin-deaths-3-ve/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">rated this</a>&nbsp;claim “False” and reported that the whistleblower’s warning could not be tied to the three deaths in question.</font></p><h2 style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ROBERT MERCER BEHIND JOHN BOLTON SUPER PAC</font></span></h2><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The John Bolton Super PAC, run by the same John Bolton who is now the National Security Advisor of the United States, has spent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/indexpend.php?cmte=C00542464&cycle=2018&txt=" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">$560,570</a>supporting Nicholson. The PAC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/19/bolton-pac-launches-new-ad-to-benefit-nicholson-fo/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">plans to</a>&nbsp;spend $1 million to help Nicholson defeat Vukmir in the primary.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Super PAC has been largely funded by hedge fund manager&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Robert_Mercer" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Robert Mercer</a>, one of the “blow it all up” billionaire backers behind Trump and one of the first investors in the controversial “psy-ops” organization&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cambridge_Analytica" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Cambridge Analytica</a>. Good governance groups Democracy 21 and Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) filed a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.democracy21.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CREW-D21-Cambridge-Analytica-Complaint.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">complaint</a>&nbsp;against the John Bolton Super PAC in March 2018, claiming that the PAC’s work with Cambridge Analytica and SCL Industries violated election laws prohibiting foreign nationals from “directly or indirectly” participating in American political campaigns.</font></p><h2 style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">KOCH FRONT GROUP: CONCERNED VETERANS FOR AMERICA</font></h2><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The billionaire&nbsp;<a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Koch_Brothers" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Koch brothers</a>&nbsp;are the also donating heavily to an array of PACs attacking Baldwin. Concerned Veterans for America (CVA)</span>&nbsp;is a Koch front group based in Arlington, Virginia. CVA purports to be a grassroots group of vets who want to reform the VA. But the phony front group is the only known “veterans” group pushing for the privatization of the of the VA, which provides comprehensive health care services to the nation’s nine million veterans. After being fired via Twitter in March, Trump’s Secretary of Veterans Affairs David Shulkin warned in an op-ed in the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/opinion/shulkin-veterans-affairs-privatization.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;"><em style="box-sizing: inherit;">New York Times</em></a>&nbsp;that the VA is entangled in a “brutal power struggle” over privatization.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As of March 8, 2018, CVA had spent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wpr.org/concerned-veterans-america-drops-another-1-6m-baldwin" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">$3.1 million</a>&nbsp;against Baldwin, including ads on the same false claims made by America’s PAC that she was responsible for deaths at a VA hospital. In addition, CVA’s Executive Director Dan Caldwell flew to Wisconsin to participate as a panelist in the first GOP primary debate between Vukmir and Nicholson. The debate was sponsored by none other than the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/26/kevin-nicholson-leah-vukmir-clash-first-republican-u-s-senate-debate/556425002/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Kochs’ astroturf organization, Americans for Prosperity.</a>&nbsp;The candidates predictably embraced every Koch policy as they vied for the billionaires’ endorsement and money, but the debate did allow Vukmir to savage Nicholson as a former Democrat.</font></p><h2 style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">KOCH’S FREEDOM PARTNERS</font></span></h2><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Freedom_Partners" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Freedom Partners</a>&nbsp;is the Kochs’ non-profit 501(c)(6) dark money “trade group” funded by the Kochs and staffed with Koch operatives. As of April 28, 2018, Freedom Partners has spent more than $1.6 million&nbsp;<a href="https://freedompartners.org/press/wisconsin-deserves-better-freedom-partners-launches-1-6-million-ad-campaign-calling-senator-baldwin-protecting-rigged-system/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">on attack ads</a>&nbsp;accusing Baldwin of “rigging the system” by voting for higher taxes (which paid for programs such as the Affordable Care Act).</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After a seemingly grassroots Tea Party uprising against the 2010 Affordable Care Act, it was later revealed that the Kochs played a major role bankrolling the many right-wing groups involved. When asked about why the Kochs were campaigning against health care, Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips told the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/us/politics/koch-group-seeks-lasting-voice-for-small-government.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;"><em style="box-sizing: inherit;">New York Times</em></a>&nbsp;that the plan was to discredit the government (or as he put it, the “social welfare boondoggle”) in preparation for the fight over climate change.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; box-sizing: inherit; padding: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Stay tuned, this interesting race is likely to get a lot more interesting. Leah Vukmir won the GOP straw poll at the Republican state convention this weekend with 72 percent of the vote. This is after Vukmir began&nbsp;<a href="https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/baldwin-challenger-vukmir-puts-team-terrorist" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">tweeting out photos</a>&nbsp;of Baldwin and Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the planner of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, calling them<b>“Team Terrorist.”</b>&nbsp;The crude move, allegedly protesting Baldwin’s silence on the Gina Haspel CIA nomination, was denounced as an “irresponsible campaign blunder” by far-right news outlets and “embarrassing” by Nicholson. Baldwin had been waiting to meet with Haspel, who had cancelled a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-senate-candidate-says-tammy-baldwin-is-on-team-terrorists-because-of-her-position-on-trump-cia-pick_us_5af35edce4b0859d11d0159d" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">scheduled meeting.</a></font></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===</font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>