Here’s the key line: “…the super PAC allies of Cruz and Rubio are circling like vultures around the megadonors who have supported rival GOP presidential candidates …”
“The 100 biggest donors of 2016 cycle have spent $195 million trying to influence the presidential election ? more than the $155 million spent by the 2 million smallest donors combined — according to a POLITICO analysis of campaign finance data.
The analysis found that the leading beneficiaries of checks from the top 100 donors were Jeb Bush’s floundering campaign for the GOP nomination (a supportive super PAC received $49 million from donors on the list), Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton (super PACs dedicated to her raised $38 million from top 100 donors) and Ted Cruz’s insurgent GOP campaign ($37 million).
In fact, despite his attacks on his party’s donor class and establishment, Cruz, the Texas senator who won last week’s Iowa caucuses, appears to have locked down the support of four of the top six donors ? the Wilks family of Cisco, Texas (the No. 1 donor on POLITICO’s list), New York hedge fund tycoon Bob Mercer (No. 2), Texas energy investor Toby Neugebauer (No. 4) and Illinois manufacturing moguls Dick and Liz Uihlein (No. 6) ? but only one other donor on the list.
Conversely, a super PAC supporting Cruz’s GOP rival Marco Rubio raised just $22 million from POLITICO’s list, but the Florida senator appears to have the support of 14 of the top 100 donors, suggesting his ultra-rich supporters might be willing to spend even more to support him if he survives his widely panned Saturday night debate performance and emerges as the establishment’s best bet to knock off Cruz and national GOP polling leader Donald Trump.
The findings explain why, on the eve of Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary, the super PAC allies of Cruz and Rubio are circling like vultures around the megadonors who have supported rival GOP presidential candidates whose campaigns are floundering, like Bush, or those who have already dropped out, like Rand Paul. …”
It’s funny because Hillary Clinton is actually their second choice behind ¡Jeb! whose campaign is imploding and has no chance at this point. For some reason, Hillary won’t release the transcripts of the speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs.
Note: BTW, Ted Cruz gets his healthcare through Goldman Sachs, or at least was doing so before he had to drop it to run for president.
Update: Let’s play count the Jewish billionaires on this list: the Wilks family (Assembly of Yahweh, weird Judeo-Christian cult), Robert Mercer, Hank Greenberg, George Soros, Norman Braman, Paul Singer, Tom Steyer (1/2 Jewish on father’s side), and Haim Saban. Of the top eleven 2016 donors, six are Jews, one is half-Jewish, and one belongs to a religion that mixes Judaism and Christianity.
Robert Mercer, the billionaire who is backing Ted Cruz, is a Jew:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mercer_(businessman)
The refugee welcoming, open borders millionaire donor class wants even more towel heads coming in. Somehow, I think most people aren’t thrilled with that idea.
https://video-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hvideo-xlt1/v/t42.1790-2/12644613_1638771276388387_384256005_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjYxNSwicmxhIjo1NzksInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoidjNfNDI2X2NyZl8yM19tYWluXzMuMF9zZCJ9&rl=615&vabr=342&oh=83a054a3847134fa431ced66d4eba821&oe=56B9221E
This is how Racial Reality works in 21st century America.
A black guy beats up a white guy.
White guy thanks the black guy for demonstrating his superiority over the white guy who is then to accept his cuckish position vis-a-vis the black guy. And since it is natural for the black guy to dominate over the white guy, white guy must apologize for past ‘racism’ because it robbed black men of their naturally deserved superiority over white men.
And the white girl cuts off ties with the white guy and uses her womb to produce babies for the black guy.
In a nutshell, black guy beats up white guy, white guy thanks the black guy and apologizes, and white girl has babies with black guy.
This is the new racial ideal. But it’s paved over with the pompous rhetoric of MLK as if interracism is just about learning to love all races in colorblind fashion.
Look at sports. Black males beat up white males, white male fans cheer for black male victory, and white girls throw themselves at blacks.
So, in a way, all this controversy about ‘racism’ isn’t so much about the white ‘historical sin’ of having denied equality to black males. If that had been the essence of the ‘sin’, it wouldn’t seem so bad, so very wrong.
The white ‘sin’ seems especially bad vis-a-vis the black man because it denied the natural right of superiority to the black guy. In the current US where the culture is dominated by rap music, rough sports, and wild sex where penis size and muscularity are king, the Negro Male will be seen as the Lion King. He will be seen as the naturally deserving winner of all.
So, the great irony of ‘anti-racism’ is that it is premised on the race-ist conviction that black males ARE SUPERIOR to white males. So, white males not only denied black males equality in the past but denied black males the right to be King by Bio-Natural Right.
After all, there is no controversy about ‘too many black running backs’ since it is assumed that blacks are naturally better at running. (No one calls for diversity in black-dominated sports positions.)
But there is controversy about ‘too many white quarterbacks’ since blacks are seen as naturally superior, therefore deserving to dominate the leadership position in football as well.
Imagine if a pack of wolves enslaved another pack of wolves and denied equal rights to the enslaved wolf pack. That would be bad but not totally bad. Once the unfair laws are removed, all wolves would be equal.
But imagine if a pack of coyotes enslaved a pack of wolves and denied equal rights to the wolf pack. That would seem worse because, by Bio-Natural Rights, the bigger/stronger wolves should have dominance over coyotes. So, it would appear as a double-sin. Coyotes not only denied the right of equality to the wolves but the wolves’ right to dominate over inferior and weaker coyotes.
And this is the real underlying racial complex in America. It is not so much about black males having been denied equality in the past but about having being denied their rightful superiority over white males.
And we are seeing this play out in the ‘cuckold fetish’ phenom. On some psychological level, it appears to be about white male apology to the black male for having robbed him of not only racial equality but the naturally-ordained superiority over white males. The cuckish Ken-Burns-like white male is saying, “You black males are superior. You deserve my wife, my daughter, my mother, etc. And I, as a dorky white boy, deserves to be a cuck.”
Now, black males are not superior to white males in every department. White males are, on average, higher in IQ and have certain emotional qualities that allow for better cooperation, teamwork, and social success. But such characteristics tend to be asexual — intelligence isn’t a male trait cuz plenty of women are smart — , and besides, American/Western society has been so vulgarized, animalized, sexualized, and winner-takes-all-ized that people place sexual, athletic, and funky-musical value above all other values.
In a world where culture is no longer defined by seriousness or maturity, it’s all about who can rap loudest and swinging his dong farthest.
In this cultural climate, the white man has come to see the black man as the natural superior. Therefore, the so-called ‘anti-racism’ is really founded on race-ist belief that black males are indeed better than white males. The cuckish boxing documentary UNFORGIVABLE BLACKNESS by dorky Ken Burns was really about this sexual-racial complex.
It was about celebrating the fact that the black man can beat up white men and then attract white women for the very fact that he beat up white men. In her essence, the woman is a whore and prefers the winner over the loser even if the winner is of another race and the loser is of her own race. (It’s like French women went with German occupiers and sneered at French men who were seen as losers. And Japanese women went with American Occupiers and sneered at Japanese men as losers.)
We live in the of UNFORGIVABLE WHITENESS where white-male-ness is to be reviled not so much because it denied the black male equal rights in the past but because it denied the black male his deserved SUPERIORITY over the white guy.
Since black man is seen as superior, white males now believe black males should have first picks on the best-looking white women and that inferior white males must take the left-overs.
Rap culture, black dominated sports, and interracist sexual culture speak not of racial equality but black male domination over the men of all other races.
So, the promise of racial equality is now impossible in America. In words, we are lectured about ‘equality’, but in images, sounds, sports, and sex, the New America is about how superior black males must have first pick and access to the women of all races while the cucked out inferior males must cheer for black male victory. Look at all those cuckish white boys cheering for black athletes who beat up white boys and take white girls.
In the end, the problem is that Nature doesn’t obey Political Correctness.
‘Progressivism’ promised us that the removal of social discrimination would lead to racial equality for all since ‘race is just a myth’.
But what happened is that Nature, no longer hampered by social taboos-laws-and-norms, got to pick the winners and losers.
Of course, this means lots of black women will be angry as hell since so many black males go with white females. If black males are seen a superior males for their strength and prowess, white women are seen as superior in beauty for their long hair(esp if blonde) and faces. Lots of black men no longer want to go near any black woman who looks like their mothers because they now see black women as ugly or uglier. With so many single black mothers, you’d think black men would go with black women and you would think that the Jewish-controlled media would encourage black men go marry black women(since so many black women are suffering in loneliness), but it is otherwise. For all the professed Jewish Liberal compassion for black women, the Liberal Media keep encouraging black men to look for mates outside the race so that more black women will be left lonely and bitter. Increasing numbers of black men choose white women. Black women are angry as hell over this but repress their jealous rage and pretend it’s about something else by raising ruckus over stuff like Black Lives Matter.
In fact, it’s not white men oppressing black women but white women seducing black men that makes black women most angry. This is why so many black women were hooting and cheering when OJ was declared innocent. They loved the fact that the ‘white bitch’ was killed. Indeed, black women hoped that OJ did kill her and loved him for having killed her.
The funny thing about promotion of interracialism is the very act of mixing races will destroy the very thing that fueled interracial passion in the first place. After all, if black men think mixed-raced-ness is the best, they should go with mixed-race women. But they prefer ‘pure’ white blonde women who are not mixed in race. But the product of black-mating-with-a-white-blonde is a mulatto, not a white blonde. So, the mixing destroys the very physical qualities that attracted black men to white women in the first place. Look at Tiger Woods. He’s mixed race, and the media promoted him as the mixed-race ideal. But all his sexual preferences have been for ‘pure’ Nordic white women. So, his sexual actions seem to indicate that black or mixed-race men(such as Tiger) believe ‘pure’ white women to be most desirable. But then, the race-mixing will result in the loss of such ‘purity’ that black men lust after so much.
Nature pays no heed to PC.
In a way, SJW shrillness and hysteria reflect their desperate efforts to repress the obvious that they are not capable of processing.
SJW, especially the males, have been led to believe that race is just a myth and that all races are the same. They’ve been made to believe that equality is attainable IF white males atone enough and give back enough. PC has brainwashed them from the cradle to believe this is true and must be true, and if you disagree, you are a terrible ‘racist’, OMG!!! And SJW want to believe this.
But they see the reality in the post-civil-rights world, and things are not playing out as was promised.
Racial differences permeate into every facet of life. In sports, sex, academia, music, science, law, and etc. And these differences are the products of nature than society.
But SJW have been so brainwashed that they cannot make themselves to believe this. SJW complex isn’t so much a matter of having wrong facts or theories. Facts and theories are about research and reason, and they can be proved or disproved.
If SJW only rationally and dryly believed in what they did, their minds could be changed by better facts and ideas.
The problem is that SJW have been in-spiritualized with holy passion for MLK, Harriet Tubman, Noble Negro imagery, Holocaust imagery, and etc. SJW also grew up worshiping the Negro as sports hero and music star.
So, it is difficult for the SJW to abandon their views. It would not only be a matter of changing ideas or views but akin to abandoning faith in God or even killing god. They have a quasi-religious attachment and faith in ‘progress’ that has become associated with holy Negroes and the sanctimony of ‘white guilt’.
This is why anti-SJW movement must be iconoclastic than merely rationalist or empirical. Asking SJW to abandon their views is akin to telling Christians to stop believing in God or Jesus. It’s a matter of Idol-ogy as well as ideology. It’s like the power of Christianity isn’t just about the creed but about the myth of holy Jesus as Son of God. Remove the Christ narrative, and Christianity-as-ideology would be just another school of philosophy for people to accept or reject. It is because of the holy Jesus narrative that Christianity went from an idea for the mind to an icon for the heart. As such, it became blasphemous for anyone to deny its eternal truth.
If we take MLK’s message, it was the same old same old stuff that’s been said many times before by the likes of Gandhi and others. MLK holds a special place because he’s been turned into a holy icon.
One cannot discuss anything with SJW because their mind-set is essentially ‘religious’. They hold some things to be not only true but holy. Indeed, the truth is inseparable from the holiness as far as SJW are concerned. They’ve been made to revere certain icons so much that the latter’s espousal of certain ideas renders the ideas true. This isn’t rational, but it is how the SJW mindset works. Since MLK myth is holy, the things he said must be holy.. and true. And anyone who says otherwise is a heretic.
I wonder if Anglos achieved so much more than other people because they found a means to turn off the emotions and sanctimony. Muted emotions allowed more freedom of discourse since even controversial or unorthodox view could be voiced with reason, pondered, and then accepted or rejected on the basis of factual or rational merit. In contrast, more emotional cultures often tended to shut people down or carry them away.
PC has made the new UK less controlled and temperate.
Andrea, I see you just won’t quit your Negro-worship, will you? Always trying to coat it seemingly pro-white rhetoric.
How long have you been spewing this black superiority on white nationalist forums noow, three years? White women will still prefer their white men, and they won’t be going in droves for blacks. Only the least desirable ones are doing. Get over it, and go spew your cuckold fantasies somewhere else.
Horrendously long comment that had nothing to do with campaign spending.
Sir, recently I did support your lauding of Jeb Bush’s integrity, and I stand fast on that.
That said : his beliefs continue to blow my mind. Here are a couple of his gems from the last 48-72 hours…
‘I am really not that big on the 1st Amendment.’
‘We need to increase military spending.’
That last comment, Sir, in light of the fact that we already spend 55% of the budget on such matters.
A small note : during the 80s, President Reagan was continually lambasted by what many considered to be his insane raising of the military budget to 4-5% of the budget. The Soviet Union, at that time, was routinely spending 25%, and, soon enough, it broke them.
Those comments, and another older one, ‘I consider myself a Latin American’, are really quite amazing.