Club for Growth Endorses Bill Richardson

Take a read through Democratic Presidential White Paper: One of These Candidates is not Like the Other by the Club for Growth.

It may be the nicest things you will ever see a group of free-market economists say about a Democrat.

 

It was grudgingly muted respect for Richardson. I believe a better description of the clubforgrowth would be extremely right-wing politicos, economists, and theorists.....rather than "free-market economists"

 

Then you haven't read their reviews of the Republican candidates...

 

You're 100% right on this. I like 527s like this that do the studies and provide information, but it's dangerous to use them as a single source for evaluating a candidate. They get dangerously partisan and political when providing their results. And it is hard to believe otherwise when the organization creates and promotes attack ads against certain candidates.

I do not like Huckabee, but I don't endorse the attack ads against him. Make his record known, but not in a insincere manner. We have enough of that already in the political process.

 

It would be more appropriate if you would read the analysis of all candidates before positing such a ludicrous argument.

Please read all of the assessments and tell me which candidate the Club for Growth is supporting.

 

It would be more appropriate if you read what I wrote, before posting a ludicrous rebuttal.

Did I mention which candidate the Club for Growth was supporting? No.

Did I mention which candidate the Club for Growth was attacking? Yes.

 

Your mention of specific names is irrelevant. In fact, you mentioned no names at all -- regardless of the claim in your next post.

What is relevant is that your accusations do not hold up to the light of truth. The truth, in this instance, being provided by a thorough and comprehensive analysis of all of the published candidate profiles.

This isn't an argument about one candidate, this is a baseless attack on the methodology and the honesty of the organization.

 

The Club for Growth is not any different then the sierra club, each one has their own view that they want to promote.

 

I mentioned Mike Huckabee. Care to refute?

I'm talking about attack ads.

It's not baseless. They have been running ads against one particular GOP candidate, who (barely) is a much better Fis-con than Richardson, let alone any of the Dems. They have been running these ads for months now, going back to the first Iowa straw poll.

Huckabee is clearly in Richardson's class by their methodology. In fact, the two candidates are almost clones of each other in their respective parties. But where Richardson gets praise, Huckabee has been attacked relentlessly by Pat Toomey.

I agree, the pure analysis is useful. In fact, I kinda wish they would look at some of the anuses around here.

 

Exactly.

Club for Growth is a national network of thousands of Americans, from all walks of life, who believe that prosperity and opportunity come through economic freedom. We work to promote public policies that promote economic growth primarily through legislative involvement, issue advocacy, research, training and educational activity.
​

The confusion here is that some people are mistaking the Club's focus on "economic freedom" for a focus on " extremely right-wing politicos, economists, and theorists."

This is clearly due to a lack of research and could be cleared up with less than twenty minutes of diligent research.

As example of the Club's work is
1,028 Economists Oppose Protectionist Policies.

 

Personally, I will not donate to any 527 that produces attack ads. I think that is a bad use of the funds for this type of special interest category enterprise.

If the Club for Growth published side-by-sides in newspapers, I would be ok with that. But relentlessly attacking Huckaboo (of whom I am no fan myself), undoes any objectivity they may have purported to have.

 

You mentioned no names at all -- in relation to the discussion of the Club in this thread. Your mention of Huckabee, while placed in this thread, was a side note.

Have you even read the analyses to which we have been referring?

 

Have you seen the attack ads to which I am referring?

 

Nope. I don't watch TV. TV is the new opiate of the masses.

Reading remains the domain of intelligent and serious humans.

 

Try the Club for Growth YouTube channel. They proudly display their attack ads there.

 

Oh joy -- YouTube -- another haven for the unwashed.

Is it possible that YouTube is even more insipid than network television?

 

Does it even matter what your criticisms of the medium are?

It's a weak argument you are losing, because now you are hiding behind your media bias instead of informing yourself and divining the truth.

Ever notice how the CfG doesn't have individual features on Dem candidates on their homepage? Or that they even choose to separate Dem and Republicans in their analysis?

They do interesting analysis, and then they present it in a partisan manner.

Completely undermines any good their mission accomplishes IMO.

 

So, have you read the analysis? You continue to avoid that question.

If you will read the individual analysis, I will go visit your insipid "YouTube."

BTW, if the Club For Growth was "partisan" - as you claim -- they wouldn't be raking the Republican candidates over the coals. The root word for "partisan" is "party" and that would show horrible party loyalty.

 

Hey, if you don't want to educate yourself by visiting the YouTube Channel, and continue to post in ignorance of the attack ads this group produces, as well as the slander fests Pat Toomey gives each time he goes on network TV, then be my guest.

Again, I can't stand Tax Hike Mike, but attacking him this way is wrong. They certainly aren't attacking bigger progressive liberals like Clinton, Obama or Edwards in the same manner.

Wake up.

 

You learned to read yet, or are you still getting your world view spoon fed to you on TV?