That depends, honestly. If he sticks to his views on PACs and – should he become president – sticks to those views in terms of enacted policies as well, I think that'd be a great way of showing...
That depends, honestly. If he sticks to his views on PACs and – should he become president – sticks to those views in terms of enacted policies as well, I think that'd be a great way of showing integrity in the face of potential conflicts-of-interest.
Except if they spend money on his behalf, he's still benefiting from the very thing he decries. It's like someone talking about how awful the old robber barons like Rockefeller were, while still...
Except if they spend money on his behalf, he's still benefiting from the very thing he decries. It's like someone talking about how awful the old robber barons like Rockefeller were, while still having a tidy inheritance as one of their descendants that lets them live comfortably. Yes, you're saying the right things, but you're still benefiting from that situation you're decrying and doing nothing to change it.
It's rather amusing, really. It doesn't matter what any candidate says or does, anyone (including non-US citizens) can create a PAC in their name and collect/spend money behind closed doors...
It's rather amusing, really. It doesn't matter what any candidate says or does, anyone (including non-US citizens) can create a PAC in their name and collect/spend money behind closed doors however they like with impunity. There's literally nothing candidates can do about it. The PACs don't need their permission or their endorsement.
Yes, but he can specifically say publicly that he disavows their work and ask for people to donate to other causes. For him to just shrug and say there's nothing he can do is not quite as...
Yes, but he can specifically say publicly that he disavows their work and ask for people to donate to other causes. For him to just shrug and say there's nothing he can do is not quite as inappropriate, but is still tacit acceptance of the money and its place in politics.
He's been doing that for almost an entire year already. Dark money is one of his core policy issues. He's refused to work with PACs or accept their help, and he's spoken against them every time...
He's been doing that for almost an entire year already. Dark money is one of his core policy issues. He's refused to work with PACs or accept their help, and he's spoken against them every time he's been asked about it. He's said it'll probably take a constitutional amendment to fix the problem, and he'll support it. What more should he do that he's not already doing?
I'm looking forward to the media hitting him on this in interviews. It's just more air time on the problem of money in politics, and more time for him to pitch democracy dollars as the solution.
He's had a PAC targeting him before this. It's fair to say that PAC is a lot more transparent than this new one, though. HFWD made a splash in the crypto communities a couple months ago since they...
He's had a PAC targeting him before this. It's fair to say that PAC is a lot more transparent than this new one, though. HFWD made a splash in the crypto communities a couple months ago since they accept crypto donations.
I've watched most of his longer interviews and he's never specifically called out any PAC by name. What happens is the conversation comes around to citizens united or lobbying and he mentions PACs...
I've watched most of his longer interviews and he's never specifically called out any PAC by name. What happens is the conversation comes around to citizens united or lobbying and he mentions PACs in passing as something we need to eliminate.
I guess we'll have to wait and see if any reporters will think to ask the question. Someone should ask him about both of these PACs directly.
I wouldn't say it's like an inheritance, as an inheritance he could donate or give away, and never use. He has no control over PACs and beyond decrying and shaming the PAC, there is literally...
I wouldn't say it's like an inheritance, as an inheritance he could donate or give away, and never use. He has no control over PACs and beyond decrying and shaming the PAC, there is literally nothing he can do about it.
It's the "doing nothing to change it" part that I was specifically noting though. If he maintains that PACs are bad and eventually enacts policy to loosen their grip, then he would have done...
It's the "doing nothing to change it" part that I was specifically noting though. If he maintains that PACs are bad and eventually enacts policy to loosen their grip, then he would have done something to change it. If that were to become the case, I can easily forgive accepting PAC money in the past.
From their mission page. This isn't his first PAC, though, isn't HumanityFWD a separate older one? That seems most likely to become the unofficial Yang PAC long term, since it's got open books....
Math PAC is a Super PAC dedicated to ensuring that Andrew Yang is elected the next President of the United States.
We believe that his Freedom Dividend, a Universal Basic Income, is exactly the kind of policy that can lift millions into the middle class, giving America’s families a much needed safety net, and the homeless much needed support. As the American economy changes, we need a President who understands these changes and can revolutionize how our country functions.
Math PAC will work to ensure that American’s know that Andrew Yang is our best chance of defeating Donald Trump. We conduct targeted advertising, plan events, and launch outreach initiatives, so Americans learn what is at stake this election cycle and into the future. It is time America elects a President that has done the math so the economy can start to put PEOPLE first.
This isn't his first PAC, though, isn't HumanityFWD a separate older one? That seems most likely to become the unofficial Yang PAC long term, since it's got open books.
Yang is planning to announce a bunch of celebrity endorsements soon, he's been teasing it all week. If I know Yang, every time he's asked about PACs he'll slam them and pivot to democracy dollars as a means to reform both PACs and lobbying. Anyone asking him about it is just setting him up to pitch his solution.
So they are using the PACs to destroy the PACs? I'll show myself out of the door now
Hailer said his group agreed that super PACs were a problem but that Math PAC’s work was essential to “make sure that we are enacting election reform measures that prohibit this type of work from happening.”
I don't feel that PACs are the root of political evil if they don't allow the same mechanisms of political corruption to occur within them. If MathPAC is as honest as they say they are, they would...
I don't feel that PACs are the root of political evil if they don't allow the same mechanisms of political corruption to occur within them. If MathPAC is as honest as they say they are, they would simply be operating as a necessary evil to fund a candidate without the tools to do it himself, even if it's unofficial research and campaigning. MAYDAY PAC has been doing this for years by taking individual, human, donor funds to put anti corruption representatives in office in the US with no problems. I don't think Math PAC would necessarily undermine Yang at all.
Certainly inconvenient, given his stance on the topic of PAC's.
That depends, honestly. If he sticks to his views on PACs and – should he become president – sticks to those views in terms of enacted policies as well, I think that'd be a great way of showing integrity in the face of potential conflicts-of-interest.
Except if they spend money on his behalf, he's still benefiting from the very thing he decries. It's like someone talking about how awful the old robber barons like Rockefeller were, while still having a tidy inheritance as one of their descendants that lets them live comfortably. Yes, you're saying the right things, but you're still benefiting from that situation you're decrying and doing nothing to change it.
It's rather amusing, really. It doesn't matter what any candidate says or does, anyone (including non-US citizens) can create a PAC in their name and collect/spend money behind closed doors however they like with impunity. There's literally nothing candidates can do about it. The PACs don't need their permission or their endorsement.
Yes, but he can specifically say publicly that he disavows their work and ask for people to donate to other causes. For him to just shrug and say there's nothing he can do is not quite as inappropriate, but is still tacit acceptance of the money and its place in politics.
He's been doing that for almost an entire year already. Dark money is one of his core policy issues. He's refused to work with PACs or accept their help, and he's spoken against them every time he's been asked about it. He's said it'll probably take a constitutional amendment to fix the problem, and he'll support it. What more should he do that he's not already doing?
I'm looking forward to the media hitting him on this in interviews. It's just more air time on the problem of money in politics, and more time for him to pitch democracy dollars as the solution.
Yes, and now that someone is ignoring what he said and making a PAC for him anyway, I'd like to see his response. It should be informative.
He's had a PAC targeting him before this. It's fair to say that PAC is a lot more transparent than this new one, though. HFWD made a splash in the crypto communities a couple months ago since they accept crypto donations.
I did some googling and didn't see a response from the Yang campaign on the matter. Did he say anything about it that time?
I've watched most of his longer interviews and he's never specifically called out any PAC by name. What happens is the conversation comes around to citizens united or lobbying and he mentions PACs in passing as something we need to eliminate.
I guess we'll have to wait and see if any reporters will think to ask the question. Someone should ask him about both of these PACs directly.
I wouldn't say it's like an inheritance, as an inheritance he could donate or give away, and never use. He has no control over PACs and beyond decrying and shaming the PAC, there is literally nothing he can do about it.
Yes, but has he decried and shamed it?
It's the "doing nothing to change it" part that I was specifically noting though. If he maintains that PACs are bad and eventually enacts policy to loosen their grip, then he would have done something to change it. If that were to become the case, I can easily forgive accepting PAC money in the past.
So you'd be ok with him using this technique he specifically says is bad, because you think that after he won he'll prevent others from doing it?
I'd be okay with it if he did do that. I don't know him well enough to say anything about whether or not he actually will.
From their mission page.
This isn't his first PAC, though, isn't HumanityFWD a separate older one? That seems most likely to become the unofficial Yang PAC long term, since it's got open books.
Yang is planning to announce a bunch of celebrity endorsements soon, he's been teasing it all week. If I know Yang, every time he's asked about PACs he'll slam them and pivot to democracy dollars as a means to reform both PACs and lobbying. Anyone asking him about it is just setting him up to pitch his solution.
So they are using the PACs to destroy the PACs?
I'll show myself out of the door now
Sounds like MAYDAY, too, which is Lawrence Lessig's PAC that aims to promote anti-corruption candidates with human-only donations.
I mean if that's truly the point of the PAC... Good on Hailer I guess? I'm sure we'll see in the long run if that's truly the motive of the PAC
I don't feel that PACs are the root of political evil if they don't allow the same mechanisms of political corruption to occur within them. If MathPAC is as honest as they say they are, they would simply be operating as a necessary evil to fund a candidate without the tools to do it himself, even if it's unofficial research and campaigning. MAYDAY PAC has been doing this for years by taking individual, human, donor funds to put anti corruption representatives in office in the US with no problems. I don't think Math PAC would necessarily undermine Yang at all.
There are also browser extensions for automatic redirection of AMP sites.