also I think the point Sweeny is trying to make about the taking money from the anti union pac is she can be easily bought and doesn't care where the money comes from (I mean the fact that she returned the money shows that she shouldn't have taken the money). For a person with millions, to take $25,000 from a group that is so anti union is a betrayal of union workers (if you're saying $31,500 shouldn't matter because of how small it is relative to her other money, well then she REALLY didn't need the $25k/should have been able to reject it on principle). It also sends a signal that you're willing to work with union busters. There are just some people/groups/entities you don't accept things from if you really have legitimate convictions. The thing with Sherrill is that she doesn't actually have legitimate convictions. She's wishy washy and doesn't actually stand by/for anything. She uses double talk, misleads, distracts, and has even outright lied. I think it's absolutely important for him to point out the $25k because it shows a deeper insight into who she is. You can't be taking money from a certain lobbying group and then be expected to hold firm and fight steadfast against them when the time comes.
I'm sorry to say but there are actually a few issues with your article. First of all, it's not about how much she received relative to her overall amount. $31,500 is a lot of money compared to what individuals are able to donate. Second, she took $5,000 just in SEPTEMBER of 2024. a total of $10,000 last year.
I mean the fact that you're saying she has MILLIONS and she's trying to say she can represent the working class in a state with such crazy wealth inequality and such an affordability problem.... I mean that's kind of an issue in itself in my opinion (but I do agree it's not necessarily the hill to die on for sweeny)
Also, you can't exactly say for sure what's been donated to her current campaign or not since she and Gottheimer are moving money from their congressional campaigns to these campaigns via a loophole which makes it so we don't know exactly what money's from what, so I mean technically the money can be from any donation
it's funny to me that he didn't bring up all the money she's taken from AIPAC and affiliates actually
She's also backed by a number of health industry groups like blue cross blue shield, cigna, and atlantic health systems, which is pretty problematic if you're supposed to be fighting on behalf of people to reduce healthcare costs
You make several good points. But this isn’t an article about who’s funding Sherrill’s campaigns— we’re working on that. It’s an article about Sweeney’s attack, and how/why it’s exaggerated. She’s gotten a lot of money from Wall Street, AIPAC, and others, and she’s moved some of that that money into her campaign. Stay tuned.
Well I'd love to help with that if that's something you'd be open to :)
I do think, though, that some of his points are not exaggerated and I have been very concerned about people confirming her false narrative that the SpaceX money was taken before Musk went Nazi because she took $5,000 in September 2024, taking $10k over the course of the year in total (from what we know). I know it may not seem like a lot, but the fact that she is falsely claiming that it was long before we knew what he'd become, especially considering how much money in defensive contracts she has awarded him in her role serving on the House Armed Services Committee, I really don't think it should be written off. For someone who does have so much money, who is happy to take money from corporate donors and big spenders of any kind (contrary her and Gottheimer's competitors in the race and considering she didn't have any legitimate competition last year anyway), she could have easily turned it down. She's only addressing the SpaceX donations because other candidates alluded to them in the first debate so I'm guessing she's counting on people not fact checking her when she fabricates the timeline.
I definitely agree that things on his site are ridiculous and exaggerated and I appreciate you bringing it up (I also find it fascinating that he only attacks Sherrill - I mean obviously she's leading the way, but Gottheimer is the Party's backup candidate, which he must know, and his targeting of Sherrill comes off particularly problematic when taking this into consideration; it's a bad move strategically and optically)
Another illuminating report on the NJ Dem candidates for race for governor. Thanks for the insights
also I think the point Sweeny is trying to make about the taking money from the anti union pac is she can be easily bought and doesn't care where the money comes from (I mean the fact that she returned the money shows that she shouldn't have taken the money). For a person with millions, to take $25,000 from a group that is so anti union is a betrayal of union workers (if you're saying $31,500 shouldn't matter because of how small it is relative to her other money, well then she REALLY didn't need the $25k/should have been able to reject it on principle). It also sends a signal that you're willing to work with union busters. There are just some people/groups/entities you don't accept things from if you really have legitimate convictions. The thing with Sherrill is that she doesn't actually have legitimate convictions. She's wishy washy and doesn't actually stand by/for anything. She uses double talk, misleads, distracts, and has even outright lied. I think it's absolutely important for him to point out the $25k because it shows a deeper insight into who she is. You can't be taking money from a certain lobbying group and then be expected to hold firm and fight steadfast against them when the time comes.
I'm sorry to say but there are actually a few issues with your article. First of all, it's not about how much she received relative to her overall amount. $31,500 is a lot of money compared to what individuals are able to donate. Second, she took $5,000 just in SEPTEMBER of 2024. a total of $10,000 last year.
I mean the fact that you're saying she has MILLIONS and she's trying to say she can represent the working class in a state with such crazy wealth inequality and such an affordability problem.... I mean that's kind of an issue in itself in my opinion (but I do agree it's not necessarily the hill to die on for sweeny)
Also, you can't exactly say for sure what's been donated to her current campaign or not since she and Gottheimer are moving money from their congressional campaigns to these campaigns via a loophole which makes it so we don't know exactly what money's from what, so I mean technically the money can be from any donation
it's funny to me that he didn't bring up all the money she's taken from AIPAC and affiliates actually
She's also backed by a number of health industry groups like blue cross blue shield, cigna, and atlantic health systems, which is pretty problematic if you're supposed to be fighting on behalf of people to reduce healthcare costs
You make several good points. But this isn’t an article about who’s funding Sherrill’s campaigns— we’re working on that. It’s an article about Sweeney’s attack, and how/why it’s exaggerated. She’s gotten a lot of money from Wall Street, AIPAC, and others, and she’s moved some of that that money into her campaign. Stay tuned.
Well I'd love to help with that if that's something you'd be open to :)
I do think, though, that some of his points are not exaggerated and I have been very concerned about people confirming her false narrative that the SpaceX money was taken before Musk went Nazi because she took $5,000 in September 2024, taking $10k over the course of the year in total (from what we know). I know it may not seem like a lot, but the fact that she is falsely claiming that it was long before we knew what he'd become, especially considering how much money in defensive contracts she has awarded him in her role serving on the House Armed Services Committee, I really don't think it should be written off. For someone who does have so much money, who is happy to take money from corporate donors and big spenders of any kind (contrary her and Gottheimer's competitors in the race and considering she didn't have any legitimate competition last year anyway), she could have easily turned it down. She's only addressing the SpaceX donations because other candidates alluded to them in the first debate so I'm guessing she's counting on people not fact checking her when she fabricates the timeline.
I definitely agree that things on his site are ridiculous and exaggerated and I appreciate you bringing it up (I also find it fascinating that he only attacks Sherrill - I mean obviously she's leading the way, but Gottheimer is the Party's backup candidate, which he must know, and his targeting of Sherrill comes off particularly problematic when taking this into consideration; it's a bad move strategically and optically)