Working For Us PAC New 24 Hour Report 

-536Days -9Hours -17Minuts -40Seconds

Donna Edwards’ pal Steve Rosenthal is throwing yet more money at the Maryland Senate primary. We still don’t know where it came from but here you go.

  

Also, WFU apparently had problems filing accurate reports. Last week they filed a report stating they were spending $596,627.20 on radio, which raised eyebrows with pretty much everyone I spoke with. That’s probably enough to buy all the ad time on every radio station in the state.

Turns out not only was the total amount off by over $100,000, but (1) every single line item was wrong, and (2) it was primarily for TV time, not radio. Normally I’d say “whoops,” but given the sleaziness of their ads, I’m not willing to be so forgiving.

So to recap: Working for Us, a nothingburger group with $73,000 in the bank at the end of 2015 but whose leader is a personal friend of Donna Edwards, has now spent $1,020,504.15 on her in the past two weeks. Where’d the money come from? WFU isn’t saying, but I’m gonna guess a little here. When it HAS collected money previously, WFU has gotten most of it from labor unions, many of whom are supporting Chris Van Hollen in this race. So I don’t think they got a million bucks (and then some – they’re almost assuredly not done spending) from unions. What I suspect is that a very (and I mean very) wealthy donor is personally bankrolling a series of major ad buys using deceptive and sleazy ads to manipulate minority voters into believing that Chris Van Hollen wants to cut Social Security and is in bed with the NRA.

While this may not constitute “coordination” for purposes of the toothless FEC laws regarding superPACs, if you think this hasn’t been planned meticulously by all concerned, I’ve got a bridge you might be interested in.

So when you go to the polls starting today, consider not just what the candidates look like, or what their positions are, or even how effective they’ve been as legislators. If you’re still on the fence after all that, base your decision on the character of the respective campaigns. Who’s been honest, open and forthright? Who’s dealt in half truths, innuendo, deception and outright lies?

Framed this way, the choice is easy. Go on out and vote now.

Leave a Reply