A Democratic super PAC quietly meddled in Arizona's GOP primary too

Apparently This is a new trend for some of the PACs with an obvious political lean trying to influence the other side to have a more favorable outcome.

A mystery super PAC that spent nearly $2 million meddling in the Arizona Republican Senate primary was revealed to be funded by Democrats after the group's August Federal Election Commission report was published last weekend.

That super PAC, blandly titled "Red and Gold," was able to conceal its donors -- and thus its links to national Democrats -- and avoid disclosure until after the election with a tactic increasingly used by other Democratic super PACs this cycle.

Last May, a pair of Democratic super PACs meddled anonymously in the West Virginia Republican Senate primary using the same arrangement.

In Arizona, like in West Virginia, the super PAC avoided disclosure by forming on August 1, within a month of the August 30 primary, and electing to file monthly FEC reports. Per FEC requirements, that meant the group wouldn't file a report detailing its fundraising and spending until September 20, nearly a month after the contest took place.

That said, it didn't appear to work in either state, this time.

In both cases, the Republican establishment's preferred candidate -- Rep. Martha McSally in Arizona and Attorney General Patrick Morrisey in West Virginia -- ultimately won their primaries against competitive conservative challengers seen by Democrats as more favorable general election matchups in key races. But even though Democrats didn't swing the nominations in either state, they were still able to anonymously bloody the leading Republican in each race.

Looks like one of the first instances was in Alabama against Roy Moore

The tactic has roots as far back as the Alabama special election in late 2017 between Doug Jones and Roy Moore, when a Democratic super PAC called Highway 31 was able to avoid revealing its donors until after the results were in by claiming to have done all their spending on credit. They disclosed their donations -- ostensibly made to pay off that debt -- after the election.

CNN

Looks like the Democrats are coming up with some new techniques to try and have more wins after 2016 shocked them.

What's ATS's take?

As with all things, both sides skirt the guidelines.

If it fits, it fits, right?

However, I am surprised that it's CNN reporting this.

Perhaps stricter rules and more transparency?

originally posted by: Arnie123
As with all things, both sides skirt the guidelines.

If it fits, it fits, right?

However, I am surprised that it's CNN reporting this.

Perhaps stricter rules and more transparency?

Every cycle someone is trying to find loopholes.

I am a surprised CNN ran this story too.


Edit: More surprised they didn't try and word it differently, or not go after the dems so blatantly.

The truth filter must have broken at CNN.

So running ads on TV is meddling?

originally posted by: Bone75
So running ads on TV is meddling?

Their words, not mine.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

We should probably end Citizen's United and stop dark money from running our elections.

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
The truth filter must have broken at CNN.

Somebody's about to lose their job.