Rand Paul’s Tea Party website says, “This website is not paid for, affiliated with, or authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. But how do we know that? It doesn’t indicate who paid/pays for it.
From the site in question
I mean, it’s pretty tough not to think these websites raising money for Rand Paul aren’t affiliated with a candidate. Primarily because Paul’s campaign manager, David Adams, promotes each and every one of them:
From Facebook
From Twitter
David Adams knows better. He’s knowingly promoting these sites and events. He’s aware of the appearance of impropriety and that he could be running afoul of campaign finance law.
If Rand Paul wants to be taken seriously – especially by Democrats and reality-based world Republicans he’ll need to win in a general election – he’s gonna need to stop allowing his campaign to fly by the seat of its pants. Lowest common denominator campaign activity like this will not cut it in a general.
12 responses so far ↓
1 UK Alumni // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:16 am
I’m surprised Grayson and KREF are letting this kind of thing slide.
2 jake // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:20 am
FEC.
3 JS // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:22 am
Jake,
Did you see that they are promoting it on the Rand Paul website? Visit the site and look at the fundraising tracker, I mean what are they thinking?
4 TJ // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:42 am
I don’t see why the Paul campaign doesn’t just pay for the money bomb sites themselves. What difference would it make in terms of dollars raised?
5 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:58 am
TJ, it’s because they want the illusion that Ayn Rand Paul’s campaign is supported by “grassroots”. Yeah, it’s grassroots, all right. Out-of-state grassroots. Not bluegrassroots.
Anyway, any campaign should realize that independents vote against corruption and lawbreaking.
6 UK Alumni // Nov 16, 2009 at 12:04 pm
FEC not KREF- I blame my lack of coffee so far; must fix that.
7 jake // Nov 16, 2009 at 12:06 pm
THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR LACK OF CAFFEINATION!
8 Larry West // Nov 16, 2009 at 12:40 pm
The FEC only requires a disclaimer if the person creating this website spends $250 or more in a calendar year (if I am understanding FEC regulations properly). There’s no evidence that he or she has done so. That means that a proper disclaimer is not required.
9 jake // Nov 16, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Uh, it’s not just about how much the individual spends.
There’s enough evidence to suggest the individual is in collusion with the official campaign. And with all the “pledges”?? Thousands of dollars raised.
10 Mark H (Not Hebert) // Nov 16, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Grass-roots, cash-roots…Come on Jake, are you trying to tarnish that “Paul” marketing brand, by pointing out the law?
If you proclaim yourself a “grass-roots” candidate you are exempted from finance laws.
11 tbrauch // Nov 16, 2009 at 5:51 pm
So… let me see if I understand the grass roots movement correctly.
If I have 11 friends, none of whom live in Kentucky, and each one does the moneybomb website thing, and I give $100 to each friend, well, it’s grass roots and I’m not giving directly to the campaign ’cause it’s through a website not affiliated with the campaign, then that’s a legal way to give $1,100 to the campaigns, right?
I mean, it’s grass roots and they don’t have to abide by FEC regulations or anything.
12 Rod // Nov 17, 2009 at 1:03 am
It’s highly likely that the disclaimer needs to say that the individual paid the $9.95 to register dot com. I know it’s a novelty to have voluteers these days as opposed to the usual astroturf with “bluegrass roots” as Steve put it = lobbyists, bankers, and PACs to the tune of a couple thousand in state folks.
Leave a Comment